^^^XX^^^  i 


^ 


f. 


LIBRARY   OF  THE   UNIVERSITY  OF   GtllFORNU 


LIBRI 


%: 


LIBRARY   OF  THE   UNiVERSiTY  OF   GALIFORNiA 


LIBR) 


i 


<>.. 


a 


m^M^^ 


^ 


'litSA" 


'"^% 


1 


\ 


^\D 


ir   ntiiFiinNii         ili^RiRr   HF  THF   UNIVERSIT' 


,i^ 


jol] 


_>^      CO       V^ 


''^    fMiicnukiin  LIBRARY    OF   THE    UNIVERSIT 


--rv^/J 


\w>-Ses^' 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  witii  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


littp://www.arcliive.org/details/angloboerconflicOOirelricli 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 
Its  History  tif  Causes 


Each  of  the  following  volumes^  issued  in 
uniform  style^  aims  to  present  a  brief  concise^ 
and  accurate  account  of  some  contemporary 
question. 


The  Dreyfus  Story       .     .     .      Price  50  cts. 
By  Richard  W.  Hale. 


The  Territorial  Acquisitions 
OF  the  United  States  :    An 
Historical  Review   ....      Price  50  cts. 
By  Edward  Bicknell. 


The  Anglo-Boer  Conflict:  Its 

History  and  Causes      .      .     .      Price  75  cts. 
By  Alleyne  Ireland. 


Small,  Maynard  &  Company 

Publishers 

Boston 


THE 

ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

Its  History  and   Causes 


ALLEYNE  IRELAND 

II 

Author  of  Tropical  Colonisation,   etc. 


BOSTON 

SMALL,    MAYNARD    &  COMPANY 
1900 


Copyright  l8g^^  ipoo^  by 
Small^  Maynard  Iff   Co/ripany 

( Incorporated  ) 


Entered  at  Stationers^  Hall 


First  Edition,  January y  igoo 
Second  Edition,  February,  igoo 
Third  Edition,  March,  igoo 


Press  of 
George  H,  Ellis,  Boston,  U.S.J. 


Vouchsafe  to  those  that  have  not  read  the  story, 
That  I  may  prompt  them:  and  of  such  as  have, 
I  humbly  pray  them  to  admit  the  excuse 
Of  time,  of  numbers,  and  due  course  of  things. 
Which  cannot  in  their  huge  and  proper  life 
Be  here  presented. 

Shakespeare,  Henry  V. 


82760 


PREFACE. 

There  is  no  lack  of  excellent  books  relat- 
ing to  South  Africa,  and  the  present  volume 
is  not  intended  for  those  who  have  the  leisure 
and  the  inclination  to  gain  their  knowledge 
of  the  causes  of  the  Anglo-Boer  conflict  by 
reading  some  score  of  bulky  works  written 
by  historians  and  travellers. 

My  object  is  to  provide  a  brief  and  accu- 
rate account  of  the  events  which  have  led 
up  to  the  war,  for  the  use  of  those  who,  whilst 
feeling  an  interest  in  the  situation,  are  unable 
to  go  over  all  the  ground  covered  by  the 
many  writers  on  the  subject  and  by  the  very 
extensive  official  documents  of  the  case. 

During  the  past  twelve  years  I  have  spent 
most  of  my  time  in  the  British  Colonies,  and 
during  that  period  I  have  devoted  myself  to 
the  study  of  British  Colonisation  in  its  his- 
torical, political,  and  economic  aspects.  The 
kind  reception  afforded  by  the  public  and  by 
the  press  to  my  recent  volume  on  "  Tropical 
Colonisation  **  has  convinced  me  that  the 
American  people  are  anxious  to  know  some- 
thing of  England's  work  as  a  colonising 
power,  and  I  venture  therefore  to  hope  that 
the  present  narrative  of  one  of  the  most  diffi- 


PREFACE 

cult  problems  of  British  Imperial  policy  may 
prove  of  some  interest. 

For  the  convenience  of  the  reader  I  have 
added  to  this  work,  in  the  form  of  an  appen- 
dix, a  list  of  the  principal  books  and  maga- 
zine articles  which  I  have  consulted,  other 
than  official  publications.  I  am  indebted  to 
the  editor  of  the  Atlantic  Monthly  for  his 
courteous  permission  to  use  in  this  book  por- 
tions of  my  article  on  "  Briton  and  Boer  in 
South  Africa,"  which  appeared  in  the  Decem- 
ber number  of  that  periodical. 

ALLEYNE  IRELAND. 


CONTENTS. 

Chapter  I.  page 

The  Story  of  the  Transvaal  to  the  Year  1852  .  3 

Chapter  II. 
The  First  Republican  Period,  1852-77  ...        13 

Chapter  III. 

The   British   Annexation  in  1 877.     The    Con- 
ventions of  1 88 1  and  1884.     The  Suzerainty,        23 

Chapter  IV. 
The  Grievances  of  the  Uitlanders ::4 

Chapter  V. 
The  Jameson  Raid <yi 

Chapter  VI. 

The  Bloomfontein  Conference  and  Subsequent 

Negotiations 119 


.  Appendix i37 


IX 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 


UNIVERSITY 

THEV^califoSS 
ANGLO-BOER  CONFfifCT. 

CHAPTER  I. 

It  would  be  difficult  to  overestimate  the 
importance  of  the  conflict  now  raging  in 
South  Africa  between  the  British  and  the 
Boers.  It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  on 
the  issue  of  the  conflict  depends  the  future 
of  the  British  Empire.  Rightly  or  wrongly, 
England  conceived  that  her  subjects  in  the 
Transvaal  had  been  compelled  to  submit  to 
ill-treatment  so  great,  so  deliberate,  and  so 
long  continued  that  it  was  impossible  to  re- 
frain any  longer  from  interference  unless  the 
proud  boast  Civis  Britannicus  sum  was  to  be- 
come a  jest  and  a  by-word. 

The  immediate  question  to  be  decided  in 
South  Africa  is  whether  the  British  Empire 
is  strong  enough  to  protect  its  citizens  in 
foreign  lands  from  injustice  and  oppression. 
Failure  to  carry  the  war  to  a  successful  issue 
would  prove  that  the  Empire  does  not  pos- 
sess this  power ;  and  the  result  would  be  that 
the  whole  magnificent  edifice  of  British  Im- 
perialism would  fall  to  the  ground,  like  a 
child's  house  of  cards. 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

In  order  to  understand  the  events  which 
are  occurring  in  South  Africa,  it  is  not 
enough  to  examine  the  terms  of  the  Con- 
ventions between  Great  Britain  and  the 
Transvaal,  and  to  limit  one's  inquiry  to  the 
question  as  to  whether  these  terms  have 
been  observed.  Although  the  results  of 
such  an  inquiry  might  be  sufficient  to  guide 
the  action  of  statesmen,  the  student  of  poli- 
tics requires  more  than  this.  He  would 
read  the  statesman's  despatch  in  the  light  of 
historic  evolution. 

For  the  purpose  of  a  brief  review  of  the 
present  situation,  it  is  convenient  to  divide 
the  history  of  South  Africa  into  six  pe- 
riods:  (i)  From  the  final  British  occupation 
of  the  Cape  Colony  in  1 8 14  to  1 85  2,  the  year 
in  which  the  Transvaal  became  a  separate 
State.  (2)  From  1852  to  1877,  the  year  in 
which  England  resumed  sovereignty  over  the 
Transvaal.  (3)  The  revolt  of  1880  and  the 
Conventions  of  1881  and  1884.  (4)  The 
growth  of  the  Uitlander  grievances  since 
the  re-erection  of  the  Transvaal  in  1881. 
(5)  The  Jameson  raid.  (6)  The  interfer- 
ence of  Great  Britain  in  order  to  secure 
redress  for  the  Uitlander  grievances. 

At  the  outbreak  of  war  between   France 


INTRODUCTION 

and  England  in  1803,  Cape  Colony  be- 
longed to  the  Netherlands.  In  1806  Louis 
Napoleon  was  made  king  of  the  Netherlands ; 
and  in  the  same  year  England  attacked  the 
Cape,  as  it  was  then  a  French  possession. 
The  Colony  capitulated  on  Jan.  10,  1806. 
The  British  occupation  was  made  perma- 
nent by  a  Convention,  signed  in  18 14,  be- 
tween Great  Britain  and  the  Netherlands, 
by  the  terms  of  which  England  paid  thirty 
million  dollars  for  the  cession  of  the  Cape 
Colony  and  of  the  Dutch  colonies  of  Deme- 
rara,  Berbice,  and  Essequibo,  which  now 
form  the  colony  of  British  Guiana. 

It  was  hoped  that  the  Dutch  and  the 
English  in  the  Cape  Colony  would  live  to- 
gether in  friendly  intercourse,  and  that 
eventually,  by  intermarriage,  a  fusion  of  the 
two  races  would  be  effected.  This  hope 
was  doomed  to  disappointment ;  for  an  an- 
tagonism gradually  developed  between  the  old 
and  the  new  colonists,  which  led  to  the  es- 
tablishment of  two  Republics  beyond  the 
border  of  the  Colony.  The  first  step  toward 
the  formation  of  these  Republics  was  the 
emigration  during  1836  and  1837  of  about 
eight  thousand  Dutch  farmers  from  the  Cape 
Colony, —  a    movement    which    is   generally 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

referred  to  as  the  Great  Trek.  These  men 
went  out  of  the  Colony,  and  established 
themselves  in  the  vast  hinterland.  It  is 
most  important  to  understand  the  causes 
which  led  to  the  Great  Trek.  They  were 
the  misguided  zeal  of  the  English  missiona- 
ries, the  abolition  of  slavery  with  the  safe- 
guarding of  the  natives'  interests,  and,  lastly, 
what  Canon  Knox  Little  describes  as  "  Eng- 
land's fatuous  policy  of  vacillation,  betrayal, 
friction,  irritation,  postponing,  changing, 
doing,  and  undoing." 

The  troubles  with  the  missionaries  began 
even  before  the  Colony  was  ceded  to  Eng- 
land. In  1811  a  certain  Mr.  Read,  of  the 
London  Missionary  Society,  wrote  a  letter, 
which  was  widely  circulated  in  England,  in 
which  he  asserted  that  over  one  hundred 
murders  of  natives  by  the  Dutch  had  been 
brought  to  his  notice  in  his  district,  and  that 
the  Governor  of  the  Colony  remained  deaf  to 
the  cry  for  justice.  An  inquiry  was  ordered 
by  the  Government,  and  every  facility  was 
given  the  natives  for  proving  Mr.  Read's 
charges.  After  throwing  the  whole  district 
into  confusion  by  summoning  over  a  thou- 
sand witnesses,  many  of  whom  were  under 
arms  on  the  frontier  in  expectation  of  a  Kosa 


TROUBLES  WITH  MISSIONARIES 

raid,  the  Circuit  Court  found  that  the 
charges  were  grossly  exaggerated.  The  net 
result  was  the  sending  up  for  trial  of  five 
Dutchmen.  George  McCall  Theal,  in  his 
History  of  South  Africa,  says  in  regard  to 
this  affair  :  "  The  Black  Circuit,  as  it  was 
called,  produced  a  lasting  impression  amongst 
the  Dutch.  It  was  no  use  telling  the  peo- 
ple that  the  trials  had  shown  the  missionaries 
to  have  been  the  dupes  of  idle  story-tellers. 
The  extraordinary  efforts  made  to  search  for 
cases  and  to  conduct  the  prosecutions 
appeared  in  their  eyes  as  a  fixed  determina- 
tion on  the  part  of  the  English  authorities 
to  punish  them,  if  by  any  means  a  pretext 
could  be  found.  As  for  the  missionaries 
of  the  London  Society,  from  that  time  they 
were  held  by  the  frontier  colonists  to  be 
slanderers  and  public  enemies."  That  the 
actions  of  the  missionaries  really  influenced 
the  Dutch  in  their  determination  to  leave  the 
Colony  is  shown  by  a  manifesto  published 
by  Pieter  Retief,  one  of  the  most  prominent 
trekkers,  stating  why  British  rule  was  no 
longer  endurable.  The  fourth  paragraph  of 
the  manifesto  says  :  "  We  complain  of  the 
unjustifiable  odium  which  has  been  cast 
upon  us  by  interested  and   dishonest  persons, 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

under  the  name  of  religion,  whose  testimony 
is  believed  in  England  to  the  exclusion  of 
all  evidence  in  our  favour;  and  we  can  fore- 
see, as  the  result  of  this  prejudice,  nothing 
but  the  total  ruin  of  the  country." 

But  a  more  important  cause  of  discontent 
lay  in  the  policy  of  protection  of  native  in- 
terests, which  was  vigorously  enforced  by 
the  British  authorities.  As  early  as  1815 
the  ill-treatment  of  the  natives  by  the  Dutch 
produced  great  friction.  In  that  year  a  com- 
plaint was  laid  before  a  magistrate  against 
one  Frederik  Bezuidenhout,  for  assault  on 
a  native  servant.  A  summons  to  appear 
was  disregarded,  and  a  warrant  was  issued 
for  the  man's  arrest.  Every  effort  was  made 
to  effect  the  arrest  peaceably ;  but  the  man 
surrounded  himself  with  a  band  of  his 
friends,  and  fired  on  the  party  detailed  to 
make  the  arrest.  A  fight  ensued,  in  which 
Bezuidenhout  was  killed  and  thirty-nine  of 
his  comrades  were  arrested.  They  were 
tried  by  jury  before  the  High  Court,  and  five 
of  them  were  condemned  to  death.  This 
affair,  in  which  the  British  authorities  are 
supposed  to  have  acted  with  unnecessary 
severity,  is  constantly  recited  by  the  Boers  at 
public  meetings,  in  order  to  inflame  the  peo- 


THE  ABOLITION  OF  SLAVERY 

pie  against  England.  Referring  to  this  mat- 
ter in  his  Oom  Paul's  People^  Mr.  Howard 
C.  Hillegas  says,  "  The  story  of  this  event 
in  the  Boer  history  is  as  familiar  to  the  Dutch 
school-boy  as  that  of  the  Boston  Tea  Party 
is  to  the  American  lad,  and  its  repetition 
never  fails  to  arouse  a  Boer  audience  to  the 
highest  degree  of  anger." 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  blame  for  this 
affair  rests  entirely  with  the  Dutch  official 
who  was  charged  with  the  carrying  out  of 
the  penalty.  That  official,  the  local  Field- 
cornet,  had  in  his  pocket  at  the  time  of  the 
execution  the  Governor's  order  for  the  par- 
don of  the  prisoners.  He  suppressed  it  from 
motives  of  personal  spite ;  and  afterwards, 
fearing  detection,  he  committed  suicide. 

I  now  pass  to  a  question  which  is  at  the 
bottom  of  a  great  deal  of  the  ill-feeling  be- 
tween the  Dutch  and  the  English, —  the 
abolition  of  slavery.  The  Emancipation  Act 
came  into  force  in  Cape  Colony  on  Dec.  I, 
1834,  the  number  of  slaves  in  the  Colony  at 
that  time  being  about  forty  thousand,  mostly 
in  the  hands  of  the  Dutch.  The  value  of 
these  slaves  was  three  million  pounds  sterl- 
ing, but  the  Imperial  Government  awarded 
only  a  million  and  a  quarter  as  compensation. 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

In  this  respect  the  Dutch  slaveholders  were 
no  worse  off  than  the  West  Indian  slave- 
holders, but  they  undoubtedly  had  a  griev- 
ance in  the  fact  that  the  compensation  was 
made  payable  in  London. 

George  McCall  Theal,  the  historian  of 
South  Africa,  says  that  the  abolition  of 
slavery  had  little  to  do  with  the  Great  Trek ; 
but  in  this  opinion  he  stands  alone  amongst 
writers  on  South  African  history.  It  is  diffi- 
cult, indeed,  to  reconcile  his  view  with  the 
terms  in  which  he  describes  the  effect  of 
abolition  on  the  minds  of  the  Dutch.  He 
says :  "  It  is  not  easy  to  bring  home  to  the 
mind  the  wide-spread  misery  that  was  occa- 
sioned by  the  confiscation  of  two  millions' 
worth  of  property  in  a  small  and  poor  com- 
munity like  that  of  the  Cape  in  1835. 
There  were  to  be  seen  families  reduced  from 
affluence  to  want,  widows  and  orphans  made 
destitute,  poverty  and  anxiety  brought  into 
hundreds  of  homes."  Pieter  Retief  stated 
in  his  manifesto  that  the  abolition  of  slavery 
was  one  of  the  reasons  why  his  band  was 
leaving  the  Colony.  Another  powerful  cause 
of  discontent  was  the  attitude  of  the  Colonial 
Office  in  regard  to  the  Kaffir  war  of  1834-35. 
On   Dec.   21,  1834,  twelve  thousand  armed 


KAFFIR  WAR  OF  1834 

Kaffirs  raided  the  Colony ;  and  it  was  only 
after  severe  fighting  that  the  Dutch  farmers 
succeeded  in  driving  them  back  over  the  Kei 
River.  Sir  Benjamin  D'Urban,  Governor  of 
the  Colony,  extended  the  boundary  of  the 
Colony  to  the  Kei  River,  in  the  hope  that 
the  strong  natural  barrier  which  it  afforded 
would  keep  the  two  races  from  further  con- 
flict. Unfortunately,  Lord  Glenelg,  Secre- 
tary of  State  for  the  Colonial  and  War 
Departments,  entirely  misunderstanding  the 
situation,  ordered  the  restoration  of  the  terri- 
tory to  the  Kaffirs.  This  action,  which 
finds  a  parallel  in  more  recent  South  African 
history,  had  the  most  far-reaching  results. 
It  disheartened  the  Boers  who  had  shed  their 
blood  in  upholding  what  they  believed  to 
be  the  honour  of  England,  and  at  the  same 
time  encouraged  the  Kaffirs  to  further  out- 
rages. 

Thoroughly  disgusted  with  British  rule, 
about  eight  thousand  Boers  left  the  Colony ; 
and  the  Great  Trek  was  accomplished.  If 
ever  men  had  reason  to  turn  their  backs  on 
an  unjust  and  unfaithful  government,  the 
Boers  had,  when,  after  losing  their  property 
and  after  being  deprived  of  the  fruits  of 
victory,  they  inspanned  their  oxen  and  went 
out  into  the  wilderness. 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

I  cannot  refer  here  to  the  early  adventures 
of  the  trekkers.  Suffice  it  to  say  that,  after 
much  fighting  with  the  natives,  and  a  great 
deal  of  vacillation  on  the  part  of  the  British 
Government,  the  independence  of  the  Trans- 
vaal Boers  was  recognized  by  the  Sand  River 
Convention  in  1852,  and  the  Orange  Free 
State  was  established  as  an  independent  Re- 
public in    1854. 


CHAPTER  II. 

The  story  of  the  Transvaal  from  1852  to 
1877  is  one  of  continual  strife  and  discord. 
The  Boers  were  divided  amongst  themselves, 
and  formed  four  small  Republics,  which  did 
little  but  quarrel  with  one  another  over  re- 
ligious and  political  questions.  Occasionally 
they  combined  to  fight  the  natives,  with 
whom  they  never  succeeded  in  establishing 
friendly  relations.  In  1857  ^^^  internal 
dissensions  were  varied  by  a  raid  into  the 
Orange  Free  State.  One  of  the  objects  of 
the  raid  was  to  compel  the  Free  State  to 
enter  into  confederation  with  the  Transvaal  j 
and  one  of  the  officers  in  command  of  the 
raiding  party  was  S.  J.  P.  Kruger,  now  Presi- 
dent of  the  Transvaal.  The  raiding  party 
found  itself  face  to  face  with  a  large  body  of 
armed  Free  State  burghers,  and  Kruger  was 
sent  in  with  a  flag  of  truce  to  seek  terms. 
The  Orange  Free  State  would  not  hear  of 
confederation  with  the  Transvaal,  but  yielded 
on  one  point,  which  is  of  great  interest  at 
the  present  time.  This  point  is  contained 
in  Article  7  of  the  Treaty  concluded  on  that 
occasion,  which  runs,  *'  The  deputies  of  the 
Orange    Free    State    promise    to    grant    and 

'3 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

extend  within  their  State  the  same  rights  and 
privileges  to  the  burghers  and  subjects  of  the 
South  African  Republic  as  shall  be  afforded 
to  those  of  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope  and 
Natal." 

So  it  is  seen  that  in  1857  Kruger  was 
prepared  to  exact  by  force  of  arms  from  the 
Orange  Free  State  the  political  rights  of 
Transvaal  Uitlanders  in  the  sister  Republic. 

At  length  matters  came  to  such  a  pass  in 
the  Transvaal  that  the  peace  of  the  whole 
of  South  Africa  was  threatened.  Notwith- 
standing an  express  agreement  to  the  con- 
trary in  the  Sand  River  Convention,  the 
Boers  persistently  practised  slavery,  and 
made  a  habit  of  raiding  friendly  native  kraals 
for  the  purpose  of  carrying  off  the  women 
and  children.  Since  this  has  been  repeatedly 
denied  during  the  past  few  months,  I  think  it 
well  to  put  the  fact  beyond  dispute  by  quot- 
ing from  four  independent  sources.  British 
Blue  Book  C.  1776,  published  in  1877,  ^^Y^  ' 
"  Slavery  has  occurred  not  only  here  and 
there  in  isolated  cases,  but  as  an  unbroken 
practice  has  been  one  of  the  peculiar  institu- 
tions of  the  country.  It  has  been  at  the  root 
of  most  of  its  wars."  Dr.  Nachtigal,  of  the 
Berlin  Missionary  Society,  wrote  to  Presi- 
14 


(  TJNIVEB 
SLAVERY  IN  TRANSVAAL Vp/^o 
dent  Burgers,  of  the  Transvaal,  in  1875^  '  '"" 
"  If  I  am  asked  to  say  conscientiously 
whether  such  slavery  has  existed  since  1852, 
and  been  recognised  and  permitted  by  the 
government,  I  must  answer  in  the  affirma- 
tive." A  Dutch  clergyman  named  P.  Huet, 
in  a  volume  published  in  1869  entitled  Het 
Afrikaamche  Repuhliek^  says :  "  Till  their 
twenty-second  year  they  [the  natives]  are 
apprenticed.  All  this  time  they  have  to 
serve  without  payment.  It  is  slavery  in  the 
fullest  sense  of  the  word."  In  1876,  one 
year  before  the  annexation,  Khame,  chief  of 
the  Bagamangwato,  sent  a  petition  to  Queen 
Victoria.  It  ran  in  part :  "  I,  Khame,  King 
of  the  Bagamangwato,  greet  Victoria,  the 
Great  Queen  of  the  English  people.  I  ask 
Her  Majesty  to  pity  me,  and  to  hear  what  I 
write  quickly.  The  Boers  are  coming  into 
my  country,  and  I  do  not  like  them.  .  .  . 
They  sell  us  and  our  children.  The  custom 
of  the  Boers  has  always  been  to  cause  people 
to  be  sold,  and  to-day  they  are  still  selling 
people."  This  fourfold  testimony  seems  to 
leave  little  room  for  doubt. 

But  what  concerned  England  very  nearly 
was  the  constant  danger  of  the  wars  in  the 
Transvaal   spreading   to    British   territory, — 

15 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

a  danger  which  increased  from  year  to  year, 
as  the  Republic  sank  deeper  into  financial  em- 
barrassment. The  Boers  had  never  been 
willing  to  pay  taxes,  and  at  last  even  the 
money  for  current  expenses  was  not  forth- 
coming. In  view  of  these  facts  the  British 
Government  sent  out  Sir  Theophilus  Shep- 
stone,  in  1876,  to  visk  the  Transvaal  and 
inquire  into  its  condition.  He  was  author- 
ised to  annex  the  Transvaal,  if  he  found 
such  a  course  necessary  in  the  interests  of 
peace  and  safety,  provided  the  inhabitants 
or  a  sufficient  number  of  the  legislature  were 
willing.  Sir  Theophilus  Shepstone  entered 
the  Transvaal  with  the  knowledge  of  Presi- 
dent Burgers,  and  proceeded  to  Pretoria. 
He  was  accompanied  by  twenty-five  mounted 
police,  the  only  force  he  had  within  a 
month's  march  of  him  during  the  whole 
period  of  his  stay,  and  at  the  time  he  issued 
the  proclamation  annexing  the  country.  To 
assert  that  the  Transvaal  was  forcibly  an- 
nexed is,  in  the  face  of  these  facts,  absurd. 
Shepstone  took  eighteen  days  to  reach  Pre- 
toria. His  progress  was  marked  by  the 
presentation  of  numbers  of  addresses  and 
memorials,  from  Dutch,  English,  and  na- 
tives, praying  him  to  take  over  the  country. 
16 


THE  ANNEXATION 

But  he  was  not  prepared  to  do  this  until  he 
had  satisfied  himself  that  the  needed  reforms 
could  not  be  carried  out  by  the  Dutch  them- 
selves without  British  aid. 

After  spending  three  months  in  the  coun- 
try, he  sent  home  a  despatch,  dated  March 
6,  1877,  in  which  he  thus  described  the  con- 
dition of  the  Republic  :  "  It  was  patent  to 
every  observer  that  the  government  was 
powerless  to  control  either  its  white  citizens 
or  its  native  subjects ;  that  it  was  incapable 
of  enforcing  its  laws  or  of  collecting  its 
taxes ;  that  the  salaries  of  officials  had  been, 
and  are,  four  months  in  arrears ;  that  the  white 
inhabitants  had  become  split  into  factions; 
that  the  large  native  population  within  the 
boundaries  of  the  State  ignore  its  authority 
and  laws ;  and  that  the  powerful  Zulu  king, 
Cetawayo,  is  anxious  to  seize  the  first  oppor- 
tunity of  attacking  a  country  the  conduct  of 
whose  warriors  has  convinced  him  that  it 
can  be  easily  conquered  by  his  clamouring 
regiments." 

But  he  was  not  willing  to  recommend  an- 
nexation, if  the  people  of  the  country  were 
ready  to  undertake  reforms.  In  fact.  Presi- 
dent Burgers  submitted  to  Shepstone  a  new 
constitution   so    satisfactory  that  he  declared 


I  HE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

"  he  would  abandon  his  design  of  annexation 
if  the  Volksraad  would  adopt  these  measures, 
and  the  country  be  willing  to  submit  to  them 
and  carry  them  out."  The  Volksraad,  how- 
ever, refused  to  adopt  the  new  constitution. 
Whereupon  Burgers  proclaimed  it  on  his  own 
responsibility, —  an  act  which  was  immedi- 
ately condemned  by  the  Executive  Council. 
Then  President  Burgers  advised  the  Volks- 
raad to  accept  the  British  annexation.  His 
language  was  unmistakable.  Speaking  on 
March  3,  1877,  before  the  Raad,  he  said  :  "  I 
would  rather  be  a  policeman  under  a  strong 
government  than  the  president  of  such  a 
State.  It  is  you  —  you  members  of  the 
Raad  and  the  Boers  —  who  have  lost  the 
country,  who  have  sold  your  independence 
'  for  a  soupe  [a  drink] .  You  have  ill-treated 
the  natives,  you  have  shot  them  down,  you 
have  sold  them  into  slavery ;  and  now  you 
have  to  pay  the  penalty.  We  should  delude 
ourselves  by  entertaining  the  hope  that  mat- 
ters would  mend  by  and  by.  It  would  only 
be  self-deceit.  I  tell  you  openly,  matters 
are  as  bad  as  they  ever  can  be  :  they  cannot 
be  worse.  These  are  bitter  truths,  and 
people  may  perhaps  turn  their  backs  on  me ; 
but,  then,  I  shall  have  the  consolation  of  hav- 
18 


THE  ANNEXATION 

ing  done  my  duty.  Whence  has  arisen  that 
urgency  to  make  an  appeal  for  interference 
elsewhere  ?  Has  that  appeal  been  made 
only  by  enemies  of  the  State  ?  Oh,  no, 
gentlemen.  It  has  arisen  from  real  griev- 
ances. Our  people  have  degenerated  from 
their  former  position  ;  they  have  become  de- 
moralised ;  they  are  not  what  they  ought  to 
be.  To-day  a  bill  for  ;^i,ioo  was  laid  be- 
fore me  for  signature ;  but  I  would  sooner 
have  cut  ofF  my  right  hand  than  have  signed 
that  paper,  for  I  have  not  the  slightest 
ground  to  expect  that,  when  that  bill  be- 
comes due,  there  will  be  a  penny  to  pay  it 
with." 

Continuing,  President  Burgers  said  that 
to  take  up  arms  and  fight  was  nonsense. 
Let  them  make  the  best  of  the  situation,  and 
get  the  best  terms  they  possibly  could.  Let 
them  agree  to  join  their  hands  to  those  of 
their  brethren  in  the  south,  and  then  from 
the  Cape  to  the  Zambesi  there  would  be 
one  great  people.  Yes,  there  was  some- 
thing grand  in  that, —  grander  even  than 
their  idea  of  a  Republic, —  something  which 
ministered  to  their  national  feeling.  And 
would  this  be  so  miserable  ?  Yes,  this 
would  be  miserable  for  those  who  would  not 

19 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

be  under  the  law,  for  the  rebel  and  the  revo- 
lutionist, but  welfare  and  prosperity  for  the 
men  of  law  and  order.  They  must  not 
underrate  their  real  and  many  difficulties. 
He  could  point  to  the  south-western  border, 
the  Zulu,  the  gold  fields,  and  other  questions, 
and  show  them  that  it  was  their  duty  to 
come  to  an  arrangement  with  the  British 
Government  and  to  do  so  in  a  bold  and 
manly  manner. 

After  showing  President  Burgers  the 
Proclamation  which  he  proposed  to  issue, 
and  after  arranging  that  the  Boer  govern- 
ment should  be  allowed  to  enter  a  formal 
protest  against  the  proceedings,  for  the  sake 
of  appearances.  Sir  Theophilus  Shepstone 
annexed  the  country  to  the  British  Crown 
on  April  12,  1877. 

The  previous  day  he  sent  a  message  to 
Cetawayo,  informing  him  of  the  approaching 
change  and  warning  him  against  any  act  of 
violence.  The  Zulu  king  sent  the  follow- 
ing reply:  "I  thank  my  father  Somtseu 
[Shepstone]  for  his  message.  I  am  glad  that 
he  has  sent  it,  because  the  Dutch  have  tired 
me  out ;  and  I  intended  to  fight  them  once, 
only  once,  and  to  drive  them  over  the  Vaal. 
You  see  my  impis  are  gathered.     It  was  to 


EFFECTS  OF  ANNEXATION 

fight  the  Dutch  I  called  them  together. 
Now  I  will  send  them  back  to  their  houses." 

The  formal  protest  of  the  Boer  Executive 
Council  was  received.  That  it  was  merely 
formal  is  proved  by  the  fact  that,  with  the 
exception  of  Joubert,  every  member  served 
under  the  new  government.  S.  J.  P.  Krugcr 
held  office  for  some  months,  and  then  re- 
signed, as  he  was  refused  an  increase  of 
salary  for  which  he  had  applied.  The  ac- 
counts show,  however,  that  he  drew  his  pay 
as  a  member  of  the  Executive  Council  for 
eight  months  after  the  annexation. 

"The  effect  of  annexation,"  says  Mr.  J.  P. 
Fitzpatrick  in  his  remarkable  volume  The 
Transvaal  from  Within  "  was  to  start  the 
wells  of  plenty  bubbling  with  British  gold. 
The  country's  debts  were  paid.  Secocoeni 
and  Cetawayo  would  be  dealt  with,  and  the 
responsibility  for  all  things  was  on  other  and 
broader  shoulders.  With  the  revival  of 
trade,  and  the  removal  of  responsibilities  and 
burdens,  came  time  to  think  and  to  talk. 
The  wave  of  the  magician's  wand  looked  so 
very  simple  that  the  price  began  to  seem 
heavy.  The  eaten  bread  was  forgotten.  The 
dangers  and  difficulties  that  were  passed  were 
of  small  account  now  that  they  were  past. 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

And  so  the  men  who  had  remained  passive, 
and  recorded  formal  protests  when  they 
should  have  resisted  and  taken  steps  to  show 
that  they  were  in  earnest,  began  their  repeal 
agitation.  All  the  benefits  which  the  Boers 
hoped  from  the  annexation  had  now  been 
reaped.  Their  pressing  needs  were  relieved. 
Their  debts  had  been  paid,  their  trade  and 
credit  restored,  their  enemies  were  being 
dealt  with.  Repeal  would  rob  them  of 
none  of  these  :  they  would,  in  fact,  eat  the'fr 
cake,  and  still  have  it.*' 


CHAPTER  III. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  whatever  that  at 
the  time  of  the  annexation  of  the  Transvaal, 
in  1877,  the  majority  of  the  Boers  were 
willing,  and  that  many  of  them  were  anxious, 
to  be  taken  under  British  rule.  The  only 
element  of  discord  was  a  small  band  of 
ultra-conservatives,  who,  after  precipitating 
the  annexation  by  fostering  internal  strife, 
were  now  ready,  their  tactics  having  over- 
thrown Burgers,  to  undertake  an  anti-Brit- 
ish agitation  in  the  interest  of  Kruger's 
candidature  for  the  Presidency,  the  success 
of  which  meant  the  retrocession  of  the 
country  from  the  British  flag. 

Nothing  would  have  come  of  this  move- 
ment, had  it  not  been  for  the  incredible  folly 
of  the  British  Government.  At  a  time  when 
it  was,  above  all  things,  necessary  to  keep 
faith  with  the  Boers,  when  a  firm  adherence 
to  the  promises  contained  in  the  proclama- 
tion of  Sir  Theophilus  Shepstone  would  have 
strengthened  the  pro-British  feeling  and  at 
the  same  time  have  cut  the  ground  from 
under  the  feet  of  the  agitators,  a  policy  was 
pursued  which,  though  free  from  that  depth 
of  cowardice  which  marked  the  actions  of 

23 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

the  Gladstone  administration  in  1881,  was 
so  thoroughly  ill-advised  that  we  can  only 
wonder  that,  when  the  revolt  broke  out  in 
1880,  there  were  still  to  be  found  in  the 
country  a  considerable  number  of  men  who 
adhered  to  the  British. 

The  first  mistake  was  in  allowing  an  un- 
necessary delay  in  establishing  an  electoral 
government.  This  was  followed  by  the  re- 
call of  Shepstone,  who  was  liked  and  re- 
spected by  the  Boers,  on  the  ground  that  his 
expenditure  was  excessive,  and  the  appoint- 
ment of  Colonel  Lanyon  in  his  place.  Lan- 
yon  possessed  those  excellent  qualities  which 
so  well  befit  a  soldier,  but  which  are  unsuit- 
able for  administrative  work ;  and  his  pre- 
cise and  rigourous  methods  made  him  most 
unpopular  with  the  Boers.  Everything 
worked  well  for  Kruger  and  his  party;  for 
Sir  Bartle  Frere,  the  one  man  who,  in  the 
absence  of  Shepstone,  might  have  set  matters 
right,  was  recalled,  and  his  duties  in  the 
Transvaal  were  handed  over  to  Sir  Garnet 
Wolseley. 

During  the  agitation  which  led  to  the  re- 
volt of  1880  the  pro-British  Boers,  becom- 
ing anxious  at  the  preparations  going  on 
around  them,  sought  to  be  reassured  by  the 

24 


ANNEXATION  TO  BE  FINAL 

British  Government  that  the  annexation 
would  not  be  revoked.  This  assurance  was 
repeatedly  given  in  the  most  solemn  and 
authoritative  manner.  Sir  Garnet  Wolseley 
was  authorised  by  the  British  Cabinet  to 
make  the  following  proclamation :  "  I  do 
proclaim  and  make  known,  in  the  name  and 
on  behalf  of  Her  Majesty  the  Queen,  that  it 
is  the  will  and  determination  of  Her  Majesty's 
Government  that  this  Transvaal  territory 
shall  be  and  shall  continue  to  be  forever  an 
integral  portion  of  Her  Majesty's  dominions." 
On  another  occasion  Sir  Garnet  Wolseley 
said,  "  So  long  as  the  sun  shines,  the  Trans- 
vaal will  remain  British  territory."  This 
was  confirmed  by  Sir  Michael  Hicks  Beach, 
Secretary  of  State  for  the  Colonies,  who,  on 
being  informed  that  certain  persons  enter- 
tained "  the  false  and  dangerous  idea  that 
Her  Majesty  was  not  resolved  to  maintain 
Her  sovereignty  over  this  territory,"  tele- 
graphed to  Sir  Garnet  Wolseley,  "You  may 
fully  confirm  explicit  statements  made  from 
time  to  time  as  to  inability  of  Her  Majesty's 
Government  to  entertain  any  proposal  for 
withdrawal  of  Queen's  sovereignty." 

One    important  voice  was   raised  against 
this  view.     Mr.  Gladstone,  speaking  during 

25 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

his  Midlothian  campaign  in  March,  1880, 
said,  "  If  those  acquisitions  [Cyprus  and 
the  Transvaal]  were  as  valuable  as  they  are 
valueless,  I  would  repudiate  them,  because 
they  were  obtained  by  means  dishonourable 
to  the  character  of  this  country." 

Less  than  two  months  after  the  delivery 
of  this  speech  Gladstone  came  into  power. 
A  month  later  he  received  from  Messrs. 
Kruger  and  Joubert  a  letter,  in  which  they 
prayed  that  he  would  give  effect  to  the  sen- 
timents he  had  expressed  so  unequivocally, 
by  restoring  the  independence  of  the  Trans- 
vaal. Mr.  Gladstone  replied :  "  It  is  un- 
doubtedly a  matter  for  much  regret  that  it 
should,  since  the  annexation,  have  appeared 
that  so  large  a  number  of  the  population  of 
Dutch  origin  in  the  Transvaal  are  opposed 
to  the  annexation  of  that  territory ;  but  it  is 
impossible  now  to  consider  that  question  as 
if  it  were  presented  for  the  first  time.  Look- 
ing at  all  the  circumstances,  our  judgment  is 
that  the  Queen  cannot  be  advised  to  relin- 
quish her  sovereignty  over  the  Transvaal." 
From  this  letter  the  loyalist  party  in  the 
Transvaal  took  heart  of  grace.  Things  were 
evidently  on  a  permanent  basis,  when  even 
the  leading  advocate  for  repudiation  declared 
26 


BOER  WAR  OF   1880-81 

his  deliberate  opinion  that  the  Transvaal 
must  remain   British  territory. 

But  on  Dec.  13,  1880,  Kruger  and  his 
associates  proclaimed  the  South  African  Re- 
public. The  Boer  war  followed,  which 
lasted  until  March,  1881.  The  Boers 
fought  with  great  bravery,  and  the  British 
forces  were  defeated  in  several  small  engage- 
ments. Large  British  re-enforcements  were 
on  the  way,  and  the  Boers  would  soon  have 
been  outnumbered  and  overmatched,  when 
Gladstone  sent  out  to  say  that,  if  the  Boers 
would  lay  down  their  arms,  they  should  be 
accorded  complete  self-government,  subject 
to  British  suzerainty.  What  had  been  re- 
fused by  Gladstone  to  petition  and  entreaty 
was  to  be  given  as  the  reward  of  rebellion. 

The  excellent  fighting  record  of  the  Boers 
in  the  war  was  marred  by  at  least  one  inci- 
dent of  the  grossest  treachery.  The  Boers 
captured  two  British  officers.  Captains  Lam- 
bert and  Elliott.  They  were  given  the 
choice  of  remaining  prisoners  during  the  war 
or  of  leaving  the  country  at  once  on  parole. 
They  decided  to  leave  the  country,  pledging 
themselves  not  to  bear  arms  against  the 
Transvaal.  Commandant  General  Joubert 
gave  them  a  pass  and  provided  them  with  an 
27 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

escort  as  far  as  the  border.  The  escort 
conducted  them  to  the  junction  of  the  Vaal 
and  Klip  Rivers,  where  it  was  impossible  to 
cross  with  the  horses  and  cart,  and  then  dis- 
appeared. Captain  Lambert  then  suggested 
that  they  should  follow  the  Vaal  until  they 
came  to  a  place  where  they  could  cross. 
This  plan  was  followed  for  a  couple  of  days, 
when  the  officers  were  stopped  by  a  Boer 
patrol,  who  handed  them  a  letter  from  the 
State  Secretary  of  the  Republic,  expressing 
surprise  that  they  had  not  kept  their  word 
and  left  the  country,  and  directing  them  to 
follow  the  patrol,  who  would  show  them  the 
nearest  ford.  The  rest  of  the  story  I  give 
in  the  words  of  Captain  Lambert's  report 
to  General  Colley :  *'  We  explained  that 
we  should  reply  to  the  letter,  and  request 
them  to  take  it  to  their  government,  and 
were  prepared  to  go  with  them  at  once. 
They  took  us  back  to  a  farm-house,  where 
we  were  told  to  wait  until  they  fetched  their 
Commandant,  who  arrived  about  6  p.m.,  and 
repeated  to  us  the  same  that  was  contained 
in  our  letter  of  that  day.  We  told  him  that 
we  were  ready  to  explain  matters,  and  re- 
quested him  to  take  our  answer  back  to 
camp.  He  then  ordered  us  to  start  at  once 
28 


BOER  WAR  OF  1 880-81 

for  the  drift.  I  asked  him,  as  it  was  then 
getting  dark,  if  we 'could  start  early  next 
morning  ;  but  he  refused.  So  we  started,  he 
having  said  we  should  cross  at  Spencer's, 
being  closest.  As  we  left  the  farm-house,  I 
pointed  out  to  him  that  we  were  going  in 
the  wrong  direction ;  but  he  said,  *-  Never 
mind  :  come  on  across  a  drift  close  at  hand.' 
When  we  got  opposite  it,  he  kept  straight 
on.  I  called  to  him,  and  said  that  this  was 
where  we  were  to  cross.  His  reply  was, 
'  Come  on  ! '  I  then  said  to  Captain  Elliott, 
^  They  intend  taking  us  back  to  Pretoria,' 
distant  some  forty  miles.  Suddenly  the 
escort  wheeled  sharp  down  to  the  river, 
stopped,  and,  pointing  to  the  banks,  said  : 
'  There  is  the  drift.  Cross  ! '  I  drove  my 
horses  into  the  river,  when  they  immediately 
fell.  Lifted  them,  and  drove  on  about  five  or 
six  yards,  when  we  fell  into  a  hole.  Got 
them  out  with  difficulty,  and  advanced  an- 
other yard,  when  we  got  stuck  against  a  rock. 
The  current  was  now  so  strong  and  drift 
deep,  my  cart  was  overturned,  and  water 
rushed  over  the  seat.  I  called  out  to  the 
Commandant  on  the  bank  that  we  were 
stuck,  and  to  send  assistance,  or  might  we 
return,  to  which  he  replied,  ^  If  you  do,  we 
29 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

will  shoot  you.'  I  then  tried,  but  failed,  to 
get  the  horses  to  move.  Turning  to  Cap- 
tain Elliott,  who  was  sitting  beside  me,  I 
said  'We  must  swim  for  it,'  and  asked 
could  he  swim,  to  which  he  replied, 'Yes.' 
I  said,  '  If  you  can't,  I  will  stick  to  you  ;  for 
I  can.'  While  we  were  holding  this  conver- 
sation, a  volley  from  the  bank,  ten  or  fifteen 
yards  off,  was  fired  into  us,  the  bullets  pass- 
ing through  the  tent  of  my  cart,  one  of  which 
must  have  mortally  wounded  poor  Elliott, 
who  only  uttered  the  single  word  '  Oh ! ' 
and  fell  headlong  into  the  river  from  the 
carriage.  I  immediately  sprang  in  after  him, 
but  was  swept  down  the  river  under  the 
current  some  yards.  On  gaining  the  surface 
of  the  water,  I  could  see  nothing  of  Elliott ; 
but  I  called  out  his  name  twice,  but  received 
no  answer.  Immediately  another  volley  was 
fired  at  me,  making  the  water  hiss  around 
where  the  bullets  struck.  I  now  struck  out 
for  the  opposite  bank,  which  I  reached  with 
difficulty  in  about  ten  minutes ;  but,  as  it 
was  deep  black  mud,  on  landing  I  stuck 
fast,  but  eventually  reached  the  top  of  the 
bank,  and  ran  for  about  two  hundred  yards 
under  a  heavy  fire  the  whole  time." 

The  natives  in  and  around  the  Transvaal 

30 


POSITION  OF  LOYALISTS 

had  been  eager  to  fight  for  the  British,  but 
had  been  prevented  from  doing  so  by  the 
British  authorities,  who  felt  that  the  general 
interests  of  peace  in  South  Africa  would  thus 
be  imperilled.  A  large  number  of  loyal 
Boers  and  British  fought  with  the  regular 
troops,  placing  their  faith  in  the  repeated 
assurances  of  the  British  Government  that 
under  no  circumstances  would  the  Trans- 
vaal be  given  up.  The  position  of  these 
loyalists  after  the  surrender  was  deplorable. 
Their  grievances  were  eloquently  set  forth 
by  Mr.  C.  K.  White,  President  of  the  Com- 
mittee of  Loyal  Inhabitants  of  the  Trans- 
vaal, who  wrote  to  Mr.  Gladstone :  "  I,  for 
one,  opposed  the  Government  strenuously 
on  one  occasion,  at  least ;  but  when  the 
sword  was  drawn,  and  it  came  to  being  an 
enemy  or  loyal,  we  all  of  us  came  to  the 
front  and  strove  to  do  our  duty,  in  full  de- 
pendence on  the  pledged  and,  as  we  hoped, 
the  inviolate  word  of  England.  And  now  it 
is  very  bitter  for  us  to  find  that  we  trusted 
in  vain  ;  that,  notwithstanding  our  sufferings 
and  privations,  in  which  our  wives  and  chil- 
dren had  to  bear  their  share,  we  are  to  be 
dealt  with  as  clamorous  claimants,  and  told 
that  we  are   too   pronounced   in   our  views. 

31 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

If,  sir,  you  had  seen,  as  I  have  seen,  promising 
young  citizens  of  Pretoria  dying  of  wounds 
received  for  their  country ;  if  you  had  seen 
the  privations  and  discomforts  which  delicate 
women  and  children  bore  without  murmuring 
for  upwards  of  three  months ;  if  you  had  seen 
strong  men  crying  like  children  at  the  cruel 
and  undeserved  desertion  of  England  ;  and  if 
you  had  invested  your  all  on  the  strength  of 
the  word  of  England,  and  now  saw  yourself 
beggared  by  the  act  of  the  country  in  which 
you  trusted,  you  would,  sir,  I  think,  be  '  pro- 
nounced.' "  It  is  not  recorded  that  Glad- 
stone replied  to  this  letter. 

Nothing  was  gained  by  the  surrender  but 
national  dishonour.  The  rebels  had  already 
been  betrayed  by  Mr.  Gladstone ;  and  they 
saw,  therefore,  only  cowardice  where  they 
were  expected  to  see  magnanimity.  The 
loyalists,  on  the  other  hand,  and  with  them 
the  natives,  were  handed  over  to  their  ene- 
mies, with  nothing  to  remember  but  the  de- 
liberate breaking  of  those  most  solemn  and 
emphatic  pledges  which  had  been  their  stay 
and  comfort  during  the  trials  of  the  rebel- 
lion. Either  there  should  have  been  no 
fighting  or  more  fighting.  The  idea  was 
well  expressed  by  Lord  Cairns.     Speaking  in 

32 


THE  CONVENTION  OF  1881 

the  House  of  Lords,  he  said  :  "  I  want  to 
know  what  we  have  been  fighting  aboutc 
If  this  arrangement  is  what  was  intended, 
why  did  you  not  give  it  at  once  ?  Why  did 
you  spend  the  blood  and  treasure  of  the 
country  like  water,  only  to  give,  at  the  end, 
what  you  had  intended  to  give  at  the  begin- 
ning ?  We  know  that  there  are  those  who 
have  lost  in  the  Transvaal  that  which  was 
dearer  to  them  than  the  light  of  their  eyes. 
They  have  been  consoled  with  the  reflection 
that  the  brave  men  who  died  died  fighting  for 
their  Queen  and  country.  Are  the  mourners 
now  to  be  told  that  these  men  were  fighting 
for  a  country  which  the  Government  had 
determined  to  abandon,  and  that  they  were 
fighting  for  a  Queen  who  was  no  longer  to 
be  sovereign  of  that  country  ?  " 

The  formal  instrument  restoring  the 
Transvaal  to  the  Boers  was  the  Pretoria 
Convention,  signed  and  published  on  Aug. 
3,  1 88 1.  The  Convention  consists  of  a 
Preamble  and  thirty-three  Articles.  The 
Preamble  runs :  "  Her  Majesty's  Commis- 
sioners for  the  settlement  of  the  Transvaal 
territory,  duly  appointed  as  such  by  a  Com- 
mission passed  under  the  Royal  Sign  Manual 
and  Signet,  bearing  date  the  5th    of  April, 

33 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

1 88 1,  do  hereby  undertake  and  guarantee  on 
behalf  of  Her  Majesty  that,  from  and  after 
the  eighth  day  of  August,  1 88  incomplete  self- 
government,  subject  to  the  suzerainty  of  Her 
Majesty,  her  heirs  and  successors,  will  be 
accorded  to  the  inhabitants  of  the  Transvaal 
territory,  upon  the  following  terms  and  con- 
ditions, and  subject  to  the  following  reserva- 
tions and  limitations." 

In  other  words,  upon  certain  terms  and 
conditions,  and  subject  to  certain  reservations 
and  limitations,  the  inhabitants  of  the  Trans- 
vaal were  to  receive  complete  self-govern- 
ment, not  as  an  independent  State,  but  as  a 
State  subject  to  the  suzerainty  of  Her 
Majesty, —  in  brief,  as  a  vassal  State. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  deal  with  the 
Articles,  for  these  were  repealed  by  the  Con- 
vention of  1884. 

The  Boers  took  over  the  country  on  Aug. 
8,  1 88 1,  and  issued  a  Proclamation,  of  which 
the  following  is  a  part :  "  To  all  inhabi- 
tants, without  exception,  we  promise  the  pro- 
tection of  the  law,  and  all  the  privileges 
attendant  thereon.  We  repeat  solemnly  that 
our  motto  is,  '  Unity  and  reconciliation.' " 

During  the  two  years  following  1881  the 
Boers  became  dissatisfied    with  the  Pretoria 

34 


THE  CONVENTION  OF  1881 

Convention  ;  and  finally  towards  the  end  of 
1883  the  British  Government  consented  to 
receive  a  deputation  from  the  Transvaal,  in 
order  to  discuss  with  it  the  clauses  of  the 
Pretoria  Convention  which  were  claimed  to 
be  burdensome.  The  Deputation  consisted 
of  Messrs.  S.  J.  P.  Kruger,  S.  J.  Du  Toit, 
and  N.  J.  Smit.  On  arrival  in  London  the 
Deputation  sent  a  long  letter  to  the  Earl  of 
Derby,  at  that  time  Secretary  of  State  for  the 
Colonies,  setting  forth  their  objections  to  the 
Pretoria  Convention. 

The  letter  says :  "  The  impracticability 
of  the  Convention  has  appeared  chiefly  in  the 
following  points  :  — 

"  (a)  The  Western  Boundary,  as  defines 
in  Article  I. 

"  (h)  The  extent  of  the  suzerain  rights  re- 
served to  Her  Majesty  by  Articles  2  and  18. 

"  (r)  The  obligation  contained  in  Article 
3,  to  previously  submit  for  the  approval  of 
Her  Majesty  all  new  regulations  concerning 
the  interests  of  the  natives  within  the  Repub- 
lic before  they  can  come  into  force ;  and 

"(^)  The  financial  settlement  contained 
in  Articles  10  and  11." 

(Great     Britain,    Accounts     and     Papers, 
1884.     C.  3947.  P-  3-) 
35 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

In  view  of  the  importance  which  the 
question  of  suzerainty  assumed  later,  it  is 
necessary  to  make  absolutely  clear  the  atti- 
tude of  the  Transvaal  Deputation.  In  the 
letter  from  which  I  have  quoted  above,  the 
Transvaal  delegates,  in  enlarging  on  their 
objections  to  the  extent  of  the  suzerain 
rights,  say :  "  With  reference  to  the  rights 
of  the  suzerain  we  wish  to  point  out  more 
particularly :  First.  The  considerable  in- 
convenience experienced  by  our  country  on 
account  of  the  lengthy  and  complicated  man- 
ner in  which  every  communication  with  a 
foreign  power,  however  simple  it  may  be, 
has  to  be  carried  on.  Second.  The  stipula- 
tion of  the  Convention,  according  to  which 
our  Government  is  not  qualified  by  its  own 
authority  and  under  its  own  responsibility  to 
communicate  with  native  chiefs  outside  the 
Republic,  but  has  to  employ  for  that  purpose 
the  British  Resident."  (Great  Britain,  Ac- 
counts and  Papers,  1884.     C.  3947,  p.  3.) 

And,  further,  in  suggesting  the  drawing  up 
of  a  new  Convention,  .  .  .  ^'  the  Deputation 
venture  to  lay  before  your  Lordship,  candidly, 
and  without  any  circumlocution,  the  follow- 
ing proposals :  .  .  .  2.  That  in  this  new 
Agreement  every  connection  by  which  we  are 

36 


THE  SUZERAINTY 

now  bound  to  England  should  not  be  broken, 
but  that  the  relation  of  a  dependency,  publict 
juris^  in  which  our  country  now  stands  to  the 
British  crown,  may  be  replaced  by  that  of  two 
contracting  powers."  (Great  Britain,  Ac- 
counts and  Papers,  1884.     C.  3947,  p.  5.) 

It  must  be  noted  that  the  Transvaal  Dep- 
utation objected  to  the  Convention  of  1881 
chiefly  on  four  grounds,  and  that  one  of  these 
was  "  the  extent  of  the  suzerain  rights  re- 
served to  Her  Majesty  under  Articles  2  and 
18." 

The  first  hint  that  the  Deputation  sought 
not  to  modify  the  extent  of  the  suzerain 
power,  but  to  abolish  the  suzerainty  itself,  is 
contained  in  their  letter  to  Lord  Derby  of 
Nov.  26,  1883.  This  letter  covered  the 
draft  of  the  proposed  new  treaty,  and  the 
first  article  ran  :  "  It  is  .agreed,  that  Her 
Britannic  Majesty  recognises  and  guarantees 
by  this  treaty  the  full  independence  of  the 
South  African  Republic,  with  the  right  to 
manage  its  own  afl^airs,  according  to  its  own 
laws,  without  any  interference  on  the  part  of 
the  British  Government ;  it  being  understood 
that  this  system  of  non-interference  is  bind- 
ing on  both  parties."  (Great  Britain,  Ac- 
counts and  Papers,  1884.     C.  3947,  p.    10.) 

37 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

To  this  Lord  Derby  replied  on  Nov.  29, 
1883,  "The  draft  Treaty  which  you  have 
submitted  is  neither  in  form  nor  in  substance 
such  as  Her  Majesty's  Government  could 
adopt."  .  .  .  (Great  Britain,  Accounts  and 
Papers,  1884.     C.  3947,  p.  18.) 

Then  followed  long  discussions  occupying 
about  two  months  on  the  question  of  boun- 
daries ;  and  we  do  not  find  the  suzerainty 
referred  to  again  until  Feb.  5,  1884.  On 
that  date  the  Deputation  wrote  to  Lord 
Derby :  "  We  look  forward  with  interest 
to  the  draft  of  the  first  article  of  the  new 
Convention,  with  the  map  to  be  annexed, 
which  will  be  drawn  up  by  your  Lordship's 
directions.  In  connection  herewith,  we 
would  respectfully  submit  to  your  Lordship's 
consideration  whether  it  would  not  be  possi- 
ble to  have  the  other  articles  of  the  New 
Convention,  namely,  those  referring  to  the 
abolition  of  the  suzerainty  and  to  the  reduc- 
tion to  its  legal  proportions  of  the  debt  of 
the  Republic,  simultaneously  drawn  up  and 
communicated  to  us,  in  order  to  accelerate 
the  complete  settlement  of  the  matter." 
(Great  Britain,  Accounts  and  Papers,  1884. 

C.  3947>  P-  40.) 

In  the  above  we  have  the  distinct  request 

38 


THE  SUZERAINTY 

that  the  suzerainty  should  be  abolished  by 
an  article  in  the  new  Convention.  This 
request  was  not  acceded  to,  for  not  only 
does  no  article  abolishing  the  suzerainty  ap- 
pear in  the  London  Convention  of  1884, 
but  the  new  Convention  states  distinctly  in 
its  preamble  that  it  is  the  articles  of  the  old 
Convention  that  are  changed ;  and,  further, 
the  Convention  of  1881  is  not  repealed  in 
terms  as  a  whole,  but  merely  the  articles. 
In  order  to  make  this  perfectly  clear,  I  give 
the  Preamble  to  the  Convention  of  1884, 
omitting  only  such  parts  as  are  descriptive 
of  the  delegates  on  either  side  :  — 

"  Whereas  the  Government  of  the  Trans- 
vaal State  .  .  .  have  represented  that  the 
Convention  signed  at  Pretoria  on  the  third  day 
of  August,  1 88 1,  .  .  .  contains  certain  pro- 
visions which  are  inconvenient,  and  imposes 
burdens  and  obligations  from  which  the  said 
State  is  desirous  to  be  relieved,  and  that  the 
south-western  boundaries  fixed  by  the  said 
Convention  should  be  amended,  with  a  view 
to  promote  the  peace  and  good  order  of  the 
said  State,  and  of  the  countries  adjacent 
thereto ;  and  whereas  Her  Majesty  .  .  ,  has 
been  pleased  to  take  the  said  representations 
into    consideration :     Now,    therefore.    Her 

39 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

Majesty  has  been  pleased  to  direct,  and  it  is 
hereby  declared,  that  the  following  articles 
of  a  new  Convention  .  .  .  shall,  when  rati- 
fied by  the  Volksraad  of  the  South  African 
Republic,  be  substituted  for  the  articles  em- 
bodied in  the  Convention  of  the  3d  of 
August,  1 88 1;  which  latter,  pending  such 
ratification,  shall  continue  in  full  force  and 
effect."  (Great  Britain,  Accounts  and  Pa- 
pers, 1884.     C.  3914,  p.  3.) 

It  is  to  be  noted  that  the  word  "  articles  " 
is  used  as  indicating  what  portion  of  the  old 
Convention  was  to  be  superseded ;  and  we 
may  arrive  at  a  truer  appreciation  of  the 
exact  position  if,  seeing  that  the  references 
in  the  Preamble  are  to  "  articles  of  a  new 
Convention "  and  not  to  "  a  Convention," 
we  read  the  last  paragraph  of  the  Preamble 
thus :  "  which  latter  articles  "  (those  con- 
tained in  the  Convention  of  1881),  "  pending 
such  ratification,  shall  continue  in  full  force 
and  effect." 

The  Convention  was  accepted  by  the 
Transvaal  delegates,  notwithstanding  that 
their  request  for  the  abolition  of  the  suze- 
rainty had  been  refused ;  and  it  was  signed 
on  Feb.  27,  1884. 

The  Transvaal  delegates  went  home,  and 
40 


THE  SUZERAINTY 

told  the  Boers  that  the  suzerainty  was  abol- 
ished ;  and  we  hear  nothing  of  the  matter 
again  for  thirteen  years,  when  it  crops  up  in 
an  unexpected  quarter. 

Article  14  of  the  London  Convention 
provided  that  "  all  persons  other  than  na- 
tives, conforming  themselves  to  the  laws  of 
the  South  African  Republic,  will  have  full 
liberty,  with  their  families,  to  enter,  travel, 
or  reside  in  any  part  of  the  South  African 
Republic."  In  1896  the  Volksraad  passed 
a  law,  generally  referred  to  as  the  Aliens 
Expulsion  Law,  by  the  terms  of  which  the 
President,  acting  with  the  consent  of  the 
Executive  Council,  could  expel  any  stranger 
"dangerous  to  public  peace  and  order"  from 
the  territory  of  the  Republic,  or  assign 
such  a  person  a  definite  place  of  residence 
within  the  Republic.  The  stranger  so  dealt 
with  was  to  have  no  recourse  to  the  courts 
of  justice  against  such  order.  Concerning 
this  law  the  High  Commissioner  wrote  to 
the  President  and  Executive  Council  of  the 
South  African  Republic :  "  Her  Majesty's 
Government,  in  view  of  Article  14  of  the 
London  Convention  of  1884,  cannot  admit 
the  right  of  the  South  African  Republic  to 
expel    or    restrict     foreigners    who    are    not 

41 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

shown  to  have  failed  to  conform  to  the  laws 
of  the  Republic."  .  .  .  (Great  Britain,  Ac- 
counts and  Papers,  1899.     C.  9345,  p.  61.) 

A  long  argument  followed,  in  which  the 
South  African  Republic  upheld  their  right  in 
the  matter  on  the  general  grounds  of  interna- 
tional law,  ignoring  the  fact  that  the  British 
claim  in  the  case  rested  not  on  general  prin- 
ciples, but  on  a  specific  contract  embodied  in 
the  Convention  of  1884.  To  these  argu- 
ments Mr.  Chamberlain  replied  :  — 

"  The  arguments  adduced  in  the  Note  of 
the  Acting  State  Secretary,  based  on  the  gen- 
eral principles  of  international  law  as  applied 
to  ordinary  treaties  between  independent 
Powers,  and  on  the  actual  or  proposed  legis- 
lation of  other  nations  (including  the  United 
Kingdom),  do  not,  in  the  view  of  Her  Maj- 
esty's Government,  apply  to  the  case  under 
consideration,  which  is  not  that  of  a  treaty 
between  two  States  on  an  equal  footing,  but 
a  declaration  by  the  Queen  of  Great  Britain 
and  Ireland  of  the  conditions  upon  which 
she  accorded  complete  self-government  to 
the  South  African  Republic  subject  to  her 
suzerainty,  these  conditions  having  been  ac- 
cepted by  the  delegates  of  the  South  African 
Republic  and  subsequently  ratified  by  the 
42 


THE  SUZERAINTY 

Volksraad."     (Great   Britain,  Accounts  and 
Papers,  1898.     C.  8721,  p.  19.) 

Out  of  the  above  statement  arose  a  long 
controversy  as  to  the  existence  of  the  suze- 
rainty, the  South  African  Republic  asserting 
that  the  suzerainty  was  abolished  entirely  by 
the  Convention  of  1884,  and  the  British 
Government  maintaining  that  the  suzerainty 
still  existed.  As  this  question  of  suzerainty 
was  the  rock  on  which  the  negotiations  of 
1899  went  to  pieces,  I  give  here  the  exact 
claims  set  forth  by  each  Government,  to- 
gether with  the  arguments  advanced  in 
support  of  either  view.  The  claims  and 
arguments  of  the  South  African  Republic  are 
printed  in  ordinary  type  :  those  of  Great  Brit- 
ain are  printed  in  italics.  JThe  ^statements 
are  t^lcen  frnm  th(  Biiliih  Piirlinmrnfnry  Pa- 
pers,  C.  9507  of  1899,  "Correspondence 
relating  to  the  Statiis' of  the  South  African 
Republic."  In  this  document  the  despatches 
dealing  with  the  question  are  reproduced 
verbatim  from   the  originals  :  — 

Claim  of  South  African  Republic. — 
Inasmuch  as  the  Convention  of  1881  was 
entirely  abrogated  and  superseded  by  that  of 
1884,  in    which    alone   certain  limited    and 

43 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

specified  rights  were  guaranteed  to  Great 
Britain  without  there  being  further  mention 
of  any  self-government  of  this  Republic,  it 
follows  of  itself  that  the  now  existing  right 
of  absolute  self-government  of  this  Republic 
is  not  derived  from  either  the  Convention  of 
1 88 1  or  that  of  1884,  but  simply  and  solely 
follows  from  the  inherent  right  of  this  Re- 
public as  a  sovereign  international  State. 

Claim  of  Great  Britain. — The  contention 
that  the  South  African  Republic  is  a  sovereign 
international  State  is  not  warranted  either  by 
law  or  history^  and  is  wholly  inadmissible. 
Her  Majesty'' s  Government  are  tmable  to  admit 
either  that  the  suzerai?ity  has  ceased  to  exist  or 
that  the  preamble  to  the  Co?ivention  of  1881,  in 
which  was  laid  down  the  basis  of  the  future 
mutual  relations  of  Her  Majesty  a?id  the  inhab- 
itants of  the  South  African  Republic^  was  re- 
pealed by  the  Convention  of  1884. 

The  Arguments. 

South  African  Republic. —  One  of  the 
objects  of  the  Transvaal  in  seeking  a  revision 
of  the  Convention  of  1881  was  the  removal 
of  the  suzerainty ;  and  this  object  was  of 
great,  if  not  supreme  importance. 

Great  Britain. —  As  a  matter  of  fact  ^  the 

44 


THE  SUZERAINTY 

Transvaal  wrote  to  Lord  Derby  that  what  they 
objected  to  about  the  suzerainty  was  the  *'  extent 
of  the  suzerain  rights  reserved  to  Her  Majesty 
by  articles  2  a7id  1^0/  the  Convention,^^  Fur- 
ther, the  Transvaal  Governmefit  stated  in  their 
request  for  the  revision  of  the  Convention  of 
1 88 1  that  ^^  revision  was  urgent,  especially  re- 
gar  difig  western  border  affair s.^^ 

South  African  Republic. —  In  the  Con- 
vention of  Pretoria  the  term  "suzerainty'* 
appears.  In  the  Convention  of  London  the 
term  has  disappeared.  This  disappearance 
cannot  be  accidental.  The  omission  was 
deliberate  :  one  of  the  parties  had  objected 
to  it  as  an  obnoxious  stipulation,  and  it  was 
excluded  in  the  new  Convention.  If  the 
British  Government  had  wished  to  retain  the 
suzerainty  in  the  Convention  of  1884,  it 
would  have  been  necessary  for  the  British 
Government  to  have  come  to  a  clear  and 
distinct  understanding  on  that  subject. 

Great  Britain. —  //  is  admitted  that  the 
word  ^^  suzerainty  ^^  does  ?wt  occur  in  the  Con- 
vention  of  1884;  but  that  fact  does  not  imply 
that  the  suzerainty  was  abolished,  for  (a)  The 
suzerainty  rests  priynarily  on  the  preamble  to 
the  Convention  of  1881,  which  was  never  re- 
pealed, as  were  the  articles  of  that  Convention; 
(b)   If  it  is  claimed  that  the  omission  of  the 

45 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

word  "  suzerainty ''  involves  the  destruction  of 
the  suzerainty^  then,  by  parity  of  reasoning,  the 
omission  of  any  grant  of  self  government  to  the 
South  African  Republic  in  the  Convention  of 
1884  would  involve  the  destruction  of  the  rights 
of  the  South  African  Republic  to  self  govern- 
ment. Relative  to  the  latter  part  of  the  argu- 
ment put  forward  by  the  South  African  Repub- 
lic, namely,  that  if  the  suzerainty  was  to  be 
abolished  Her  Majesty s  Government  should 
have  come  to  a  clear  understanding  on  the  sub- 
ject, it  is  evident  that  if  the  status  quo  was  to  be 
altered  in  the  new  Convention  it  lay  with  the 
party  desiring  the  change  to  arrive  at  a  distinct 
understanding  to  that  effect  —  the  presumption 
of  law  would  be  that,  in  the  absence  of  any 
specific  statement  as  to  a  new  relation  between 
the  parties,  the  status  quo  remained  unaltered. 
That  this  was  the  view  held  by  the  delegates 
who  represented  the  Transvaal  in  the  negotia- 
tio7is  is  placed  beyo?id  doubt  by  the  fact  that  they 
wrote  to  Lord  Derby  asking  that  an  article 
abolishing  the  suzerainty  should  be  introduced 
into  the  new  Convention.  This  request  was 
refused,  and  no  such  article  appears  in  the  new 
Convention,  This  fact  clearly  shows  that  whilst 
Her  Majesty's  Government  agreed  with  the 
Transvaal  delegates  that  if  the  suzerainty  was 
to  be  abolished  it  would  have  to  be  done  by 
means  of  an  article  in  the  Convention,  they  did 
not  agree  with  them  that  such  an  article  should 

46 


THE  SUZERAINTY 

be  included  in  the  Convention  —  a  clear  declara- 
tion that  the  suzerainty  was  not  to  be  abolished. 

South  African  Republic. —  The  rights 
of  suzerainty  under  the  Convention  of  1881 
can  be  classified  as  follows:  i.  The  in- 
competency of  the  South  African  Republic 
to  take  direct  action  in  negotiations  with 
foreign  powers.  2.  The  control  by  the 
British  Resident  of  external  and  certain  in- 
ternal affairs.  3.  The  right  of  conducting 
British  troops  through  the  territory  of  the 
South  African  Republic.  As  these  rights 
have  been  reduced  to  the  obligation  of  sub- 
mitting all  treaties  made  with  foreign  Powers 
to  Her  Majesty  for  approval,  the  suzerainty 
is  clearly  abolished. 

Great  Britain. —  We  admit  your  facts  but 
not  your  conclusion.  You  objected  to  the  extent 
of  the  suzerain  rights  under  articles  2  and  18 
of  the  Convention  of  1881,  and  we  have  reduced 
the  extent  of  those  rights.  But  we  have  retained 
the  most  important  right  of  all^  that  of  deciding 
whether  any  treaty  concluded  by  the  South 
African  Republic  with  a  foreign  Power  shall  or 
shall  not  come  into  force. 

South  African  Republic. —  In  submit- 
ting to  the  Transvaal  delegates  a  draft  of  the 
new  Convention,  Lord  Derby  enclosed  a 
copy  of  the  Convention  of  188 1.     At  the 

47 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

head  of  this  is  a  note  which  says,  "  The  words 
and  paragraphs  bracketed  or  printed  in  italics 
are  proposed  to  be  inserted,  those  within  a 
black  line  are  proposed  to  be  omitted." 
Now  the  preamble  of  1881  is  within  a  black 
line,  and  is  thus  omitted.  No  conclusion 
can  be  clearer.  Still  further,  on  the  last 
page  of  the  draft,  the  following  words, 
"  subject  to  the  suzerainty  of  Her  Majesty, 
her  Heirs  and  Successors,"  have  been 
crossed  out  by  Lord  Derby.  In  this  manner 
Lord  Derby  showed  most  distinctly  that  he 
meant  to  have  the  suzerainty  abolished. 

Great  Britain. —  We  admit  that  the  words 
and  paragraphs  referred  to  are  omitted  from  the 
Convention  of  188 1  ;  but  the  reason  is  obvious. 
As  merely  the  articles  of  the  Convention  of 
1 88 1  were  repealed  there  was  no  necessity 
that  the  Preamble  of  188 1,  which  laid  down 
the  mutual  relations  of  Her  Majesty^ s  Govern- 
ment and  the  South  African  Republic^  should 
be  included  in  the  new  Convention^  which  was 
merely  one  substitutifig  certaiti  articles  for  certain 
other  articles.  In  stating  that  the  words  "  sub- 
ject to  the  suzerainty  of  Her  Majesty  etc.^^  were 
crossed  out  by  Lord  Derby ^  the  South  African 
Republic  have  failed  to  add  that  the  words 
"  under  which  self-government  has  been  granted 
to  the  inhabitants  of  the  Transvaal  Territory  " 

48 


THE  SUZERAINTY 

are  also  crossed  out.  Any  consequences  which 
are  claimed  fro?n  the  crossing  out  of  the  former 
expression  must  fiecessarily  follow  the  crossing 
out  of  the  latter.  If  the  crossing  out  of  "  su- 
zerainty "  abolishes  the  suzerainty^  the  crossing 
out  of  ''*' self  governments^  abolishes  the  self- 
government.  We  do  not  admit  the  argument  in 
either  case^  as  we  hold  that  the  grant  of  self-gov- 
ernment and  the  reservation  of  suzerainty  alike 
have  their  sole  constitutional  origin  in  the  pre* 
amble  to  the  Convention  ^  1 88 1 .  As  the  South 
African  Republic  states  that  Lord  Derby  showed 
distinctly  that  he  7neant  to  have  the  suzerainty 
abolished  we  must  refer  it  to  the  statement  made 
by  Lord  Derby  in  the  House  of  Lords  in  March^ 
1884,  less  than  one  month  after  the  signing  of 
the  Convention,  He  said,  "  Then  the  noble  Earl 
[Earl  Cadogati\  said  that  the  object  of  the  Con- 
vention had  been  to  abolish  the  suzeraifity  of  the 
British  Crown,  The  word  ^suzerainty*  is  a 
very  vague  word,  and  I  do  not  think  it  is  capa- 
ble of  any  very  precise  defijiition.  Whatever  we 
may  understand  by  it,  I  think  it  is  not  very  easy 
to  define.  But  I  apprehend,  whether  you  call  it 
a  protectorate,  or  a  suzerainty,  or  the  recognition 
of  England  as  a  paramount  Power,  the  fact  is 
that  a  certain  controlling  power  is  retained  when 
the  State  which  exercises  this  suzerainty  has  a 
right  to  veto  any  7iegotiations  ifito  which  the 
dependefit  State  may  enter  with  foreigfi  Powers, 
Whatever  suzerainty  meant  iii  the  Convention 

49 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

of  Pretoria^  the  condition  of  things  which  it 
implied  still  remains  ;  although  the  word  is  not 
actually  employed^  we  have  kept  the  substance. 
We  have  abstained  from  using  the  word  because 
it  was  not  capable  of  legal  definition^  and  because 
it  seemed  to  be  a  word  which  was  likely  to  lead 
to  misconception  and  misunderstanding y  Here 
is  distinct  declaration  by  Lord  Derby  that  the 
word  was  left  out  because  it  was  an  unsatis- 
factory word  and  not  because,  as  the  South 
African  Republic  alleges,  it  was  intended  to 
abolish  the  suzerainty. 

South  African  Republic. —  Lord  Derby 
further  clearly  indicated  his  opinion  that  the 
suzerainty  was  abolished  in  a  despatch  dated 
Feb.  15,  1884.  He  said,  "  By  the  omission 
of  those  articles  of  the  Convention  of  Pre- 
toria which  assigned  to  Her  Majesty  and  to 
the  British  Resident  certain  specific  powers 
and  functions  connected  with  the  internal 
government  and  the  foreign  relations  of  the 
Transvaal  State,  your  Government  will  be 
left  free  to  govern  the  country  without  inter- 
ference and  to  conduct  its  diplomatic  inter- 
course and  shape  its  foreign  policy,  subject 
only  to  the  requirement  embodied  in  the 
fourth  article  of  the  new  draft,  that  any 
treaty  with  a  foreign  State  shall  not  have 
effect  without  the  approval  of  the  Queen." 

50 


THE  SUZERAINTY 

Great  Britain. —  Taking  Lord  Derby's 
words  exactly  as  you  quote  them,  it  is  evident 
that  Her  Majesty  has  the  power  to  prevent  the 
South  African  Republic  from  concluding  any 
treaty  with  a  foreign  Power,  if  such  a  course 
should  in  any  instance  seem  advisable.  This 
control  exercised  by  the  Queen  could  not  exist  in 
regard  to  a  sovereign  international  State,  and, 
in  so  far  as  this  control  does  exist,  it  must  be 
evident  that  the  South  African  Republic  is  not, 
as  it  claims  to  be,  a  sovereign  international  State. 
It  is  in  this  p07ver  ofjontrol  that  the  British 

suzerainty  consists,  [t  is  not  rlninipd  fhnf  fZr^nt 
T^ritain  has  any  cnfifrg[  (^jxr  the  jn^"^'""^  nffni^.c 
of  the  Republic  in  virtue  of  the  su^ei-aiiitv. 

South  African  Republic. —  The  Earl 
of  Kimberley,  in  an  official  despatch  to  the 
South  African  Republic,  said,  "The  term 
suzerainty  has  been  chcfSen  as  most  con- 
veniently describing  superiority  over  a  State 
possessing  independent  rights  of  government 
subject  to  reservations  with  reference  to  cer- 
tain specified  matters."  Consequently,  it 
follows  that,  if  suzerainty  had  continued  to 
exist  under  the  Convention  of  1884,  the 
only  rights  which  could  have  been  claimed 
by  the  British  Government  would  have  been 
such  as  were  "  expressly  reserved  to  the 
suzerain    Power    with    reference    to    certain 


5^ 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

specified  matters."  Her  Britannic  Majesty's 
Government  would  not  have  been  justified, 
as  a  result  of  the  vagueness  and  indefinite 
nature  of  the  word  "  suzerainty,"  in  claim- 
ing for  themselves  certain  vague  and  indefi- 
nite rights. 

Great  Britain. —  We  agree  with  you  en- 
tirely in  accepting  Lord  Kimberky s  defifiition 
of  suzerainty.  His  words  appear  to  Her  Maj- 
esty s  Government  to  accurately  describe  the  ex- 
isting relations  betwee?i  Her  Majesty  and  the 
South  African  Republic,  We  claim  no  va^ue 
and  indefinite  rights  under  the  suzercdutv^  we 
assert  merely  that  as  tier  Majesty  retains  in  the 
Convention  of  1884  certain  rights  ^^  expressly 
reserved  to  Iter  with  reference  to  certain  speci- 
fied matters  ^^  it  is  clear  that  the  ''^  superiority 
over  a  State  possessing  independent  rights  of 
government  subject  to  reservations  "  is  vested  in 
Her  Majesty,  and  that  therefore  the  claim  of 
the  South  African  Republic  to  be  a  sovereign 
international  State  is  unjustifiable. 

The  above  do  not,  of  course,  represent  all 
the  arguments  advanced  by  the  South  Afri- 
can Republic ;  but  they  are  the  principal 
ones,  and  present  the  case  of  the  Republic 
in  the  strongest  manner  possible.  With  the 
arguments  before  him  the  reader  must  judge 
for   himself  whether  the   British   suzerainty 

52 


THE  SUZERAINTY 

over  the  South  African  Republic  exists  or 
whether,  as  the  Republic  maintains,  the 
suzerainty  has  been  entirely  abolished,  leav- 
ing the  Republic  a  sovereign  international 
State. 


53 


CHAPTER  IV. 

From  the  signing  of  the  London  Conven- 
tion in  1884  there  has  gradually  accumu- 
lated that  mass  of  grievances  of  British 
subjects  in  the  South  African  Republic 
which  finally,  in  1899,  came  under  the  offi- 
cial notice  of  the  British  Government.  The 
grievances  may  be  divided  into  six  classes : 
(i)  Economic  Grievances  ;  (2)  Grievances  in 
connection  with  the  Legislative  Acts  and 
the  Judicial  Procedure  of  the  Republic ;  (3) 
Grievances  in  regard  to  Municipal  Privileges 
and  Education ;  (4)  Ill-treatment  of  Colored 
British  Subjects;  (5)  Outrages  on  Persons 
and  Property ;   (6)  Political  Grievances. 

The  economic  grievances  may  be  best  set 
forth  in  the  terms  employed  by  the  Govern- 
ment Industrial  Commission  of  the  South 
African  Republic.  This  Commission  was 
appointed  by  the  Volksraad  in  1897  ^^  ^"" 
quire  into  the  general  economic  condition  of 
the  country.  It  consisted  of  six  members, 
all  of  whom  were  Dutch  burghers;  and 
it  may  be  safely  assumed  that,  consider- 
ing its  composition,  the  Commission  would 
have  no  tendency  to  overstate  the  grievances 
of  the  Uitlanders.     The  Report  of  the  Com- 

54 


GRIEVANCES  OF  UITLANDERS 

mission  was  presented  to  the  Volksraad  on 
Aug.  6,  1897.  ^  verbatim  translation  may- 
be found  in  the  British  Parliamentary  Papers 
for  1899,  C.  9345,  pp.  2-13. 

The  Report  states  that  after  minute  and 
careful  investigation  the  Commission  ascer- 
tained that  during  1896  there  were  183  gold 
mines  within  the  State ;  that  of  these  79 
produced  gold ;  that  only  25  companies  de- 
clared dividends  ;  and  that  the  cause  of  so 
many  mines  not  paying  dividends  was  pri- 
marily the  high  cost  of  production.  The 
Report  continues :  "  .  .  .  under  existing 
conditions,  100  mines  will  have  to  close 
down.  In  that  case  an  annual  amount  of 
;£"! 2,000,000  will  be  taken  out  of  circula- 
tion, with  a  result  too  disastrous  to  contem- 
plate. To  avoid  such  a  calamity,  your 
Commission  are  of  opinion  that  it  is  the 
duty  of  the  Government  to  co-operate  with 
the  mining  industry,  and  to  devise  means 
with  a  view  to  make  it  possible  for  lower 
grade  mines  to  work  at  a  profit,  and  gener- 
ally to  lighten  the  burdens  of  the  mining  in- 
dustry, .  .  .  the  more  so  when  the  fact  is 
taken  into  consideration  that  up  till  now  the 
mining  industry  must  be  held  as  the  financial 
basis,  support,  and  mainstay  of  the  State. 

55 


-THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

"  Judging  from  recent  events,  and  by  the 
persistent  manner  in  which  the  mines  have 
reduced,  and  are  further  trying  to  reduce,  the 
expenses,  it  leaves  no  doubt  with  your  Com- 
mission that  the  mines,  after  so  far  having 
taken  the  initiative,  will  act  responsively  to 
any  economical  measure  the  Government 
may  think  proper  to  introduce.  Your  Com- 
mission entirely  disapprove  of  the  concessions 
through  which  the  industrial  prosperity  of 
the  country  is  hampered.  Such  might  have 
been  expedient  in  the  past,  but  the  country 
has  arrived  at  a  stage  of  development  that 
will  only  admit  of  free  competition  accord- 
ing to  Republican  principles.  This  applies 
more  especially  to  the  gold  industry,  that  has 
to  face  its  own  economical  problems,  with- 
out being  further  burdened  with  concessions 
that  are  irksome  and  injurious  to  the  indus- 
try, and  will  always  remain  a  source  of  irri- 
tation and  dissatisfaction." 

In  regard  to  import  duties  the  Commis- 
sion say  :  "  We  can  only  recommend  that, 
if  possible,  food-stufFs  ought  to  be  entirely 
free  from  taxation,  as  at  the  present  moment 
it  is  impossible  to  supply  the  population  of 
the  Republic  from  the  products  of  local  agri- 
culture ;    and,    consequently,   importation    is 

56 


GRIEVANCES  OF  UITLANDERS 

absolutely  necessary.  .  .  .  We  wish  to  state 
that  the  import  duty  of  I2s,  6d.  per  cask  on 
cement  seems  excessively  high.  The  high 
freight  on  an  article  so  heavy  as  cement  al- 
ready raises  the  price  here  to  such  an  amount 
that  it  ought  to  be  very  easy  for  any  local 
industr)^  to  be  able  to  compete.  Your  Com- 
mission consequently  recommend  that  the 
special  duty  on  cement  be  removed  as  speed- 
ily as  possible." 

A  very  serious  grievance  of  the  gold  indus- 
try is  that,  owing  to  the  lax  administration 
of  the  liquor  law,  the  native  labourers  in  the 
mines  are  kept  constantly  supplied  with  in- 
toxicants, with  the  effect  that  about  one-third 
of  the  labourers  are  always  incapacitated  from 
work,  owing  to  intoxication.  Referring  to 
this,  the  Commission  say,  "  It  has  been 
proved  to  your  Commission  that  the  Liquor 
Law  is  not  carried  out  properly,  and  that  the 
mining  industry  has  real  grievances  in  con- 
nection therewith,  owing  to  the  illicit  sale  of 
strong  drink  to  the  natives  at  the  mines." 

In  regard  to  gold  thefts,  which  constitute 
a  very  heavy  drain  on  the  industry,  the  Re- 
port states :  "  According  to  the  evidence 
submitted  to  your  Commission,  gold  thefts 
are    on   the  increase,   .   .    .  and    amount    to 

57 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

about  lo  per  cent,  of  the  output,  equivalent 
to  an  amount  of  ;^750,ooo  per  annum.  It 
follows  that  the  administration  of  the  law 
must  be  faulty,  because  there  are  very  few 
instances  where  the  crime  has  been  detected 
and  punished." 

The  Commission  deals  with  two  special 
monopolies, —  the  brick  monopoly  and  the 
dynamite  monopoly.  As  to  the  former  the 
Report  says  :  "  It  has  been  clearly  proved  to 
your  Commission  that  the  existing  conces- 
sion for  the  making  of  bricks  by  machinery 
is  a  great  disadvantage.  The  price  of  bricks 
is  thereby  unduly  increased.  Your  Commis- 
sion consequently  recommend  that  steps  be 
taken  as  speedily  as  possible  to  relieve  the 
population  of  the  Republic  of  this  undesirable 
monopoly."  The  dynamite  monopoly  is  dealt 
with  at  some  length,  and  I  therefore  extract 
only  the  following  sentences  from  the  Report : 
"  Before  entering  on  this  subject,  we  wish  to 
put  on  record  our  disappointment  with  the 
evidence  tendered  on  behalf  of  the  South 
African  Explosives  Company  [the  company 
holding  the  monopoly].  We  had  expected, 
and  we  think  not  unreasonably,  that  they 
would  be  able  to  give  reliable  information 
for  our  guidance  respecting  the  cost  of  im- 

58 


GRIEVANCES  OF  UITLANDERS 

portation,  as  well  as  of  local  manufacture  of 
the  principal  explosives  used  for  mining  pur- 
poses ;  but,  though  persistently  questioned  on 
these  points,  few  facts  were  elicited,  and,  we 
regret  to  say,  they  entirely  failed  to  satisfy  us 
in  this  important  respect. 

"The  importation  of  a  cheap  supply  of 
all  necessaries  required  for  mining  purposes, 
in  order  to  secure  success,  is  perhaps  too  ob- 
vious to  need  repeating;  but  we  may  men- 
tion that  the  one  item  most  frequently 
referred  to  by  witnesses  in  this  connection 
was  the  cost  of  the  explosives.  It  has,  we 
consider,  been  clearly  proved  that  the  price 
paid  by  the  mines  for  explosives  of  all  kinds 
is  unreasonably  high,  having  due  regard  to 
original  cost  and  expenses  of  delivery  in 
the  South  African  Republic,  and,  in  our 
opinion,  a  considerable  reduction  should  be 
brought  about.  In  making  recommenda- 
tions with  this  object  in  view,  it  must 
be  stated  at  the  outset  that  the  main  diffi- 
culty in  dealing  with  the  question  arises 
from  the  existence  of  the  contract  by  means 
of  which  the  monopolists  are  able  to  main- 
tain the  present  high  price  in  spite  of  the 
fact  that  the  manufactured  article  is  mostly 
obtained  by  them  in  Europe  at  a  very  much 

59 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

lower  cost.  Consequently,  the  advantages 
which  the  Government  intended  to  confer  on 
the  country  by  establishing  a  new  industry 
here  have  not  been  realised,  whilst  the  mo- 
nopoly has  proved  a  serious  burden  on  the 
mining  industry. 

"  The  mining  industry  has  thuS  to  bear  a 
burden  which  does  not  enrich  the  State  or 
bring  any  benefit  in  return ;  and  this  fact 
must  always  prove  a  source  of  irritation  and 
annoyance  to  those  who,  while  willing  to 
contribute  to  just  taxation  for  the  general 
good,  cannot  acquiesce  in  an  impost  of  the 
nature  complained  of." 

It  was  hoped  by  the  mining  community 
that  the  Volksraad  would  take  some  favour- 
able action  on  the  Report  of  its  own  Com- 
mission ;  but  the  Sub-Commission  of  the 
Volksraad,  which  was  appointed  to  consider 
the  Report,  made  recommendations  to  the 
Volksraad  which  had  the  practical  effect  of 
discounting  the  greater  part  of  the  work  of 
the  Industrial  Commission.  The  concessions 
complained  of  in  the  Report  were  upheld, 
the  reduction  of  import  duty  on  cement 
and  the  cancellation  of  the  brick-making  con- 
cession were  refused,  the  cancellation  of  the 
dynamite  monopoly  was  refused,  and,  whilst 
60 


GRIEVANCES  OF  UI 


the  customs  duties  were  taken  off  certain 
food-stuft's,  the  duties  on  other  food-stufFs 
were  largely  increased. 

I  pass  now  to  the  grievances  connected 
with  legislation  and  the  administration  of 
justice.  A  number  of  laws  in  the  South 
African  Republic  contain  provisions  which 
inflict  great  injustice  on  the  Uitlander  pop- 
ulation, but  I  select  three  as  typical.  They 
are  the  Judges  Law  of  1897,  ^^^  P^^^  Law 
of  1895,  and  the  Aliens  Expulsion  Law  of 
1896.  The  Judges  Law  was  passed  with  a 
view  to  making  the  Courts  of  Justice  sub- 
servient to  the  executive  authority.  The 
necessity  of  this  law,  from  the  standpoint 
of  the  Transvaal  Government,  lay  in  the  fact 
that,  when  the  Government,  in  its  anxiety  to 
escape  responsibilities  laid  on  it  by  judg- 
ments of  the  Courts,  passed  hasty  resolutions 
having  retroactive  scope,  the  Courts  refused 
to  recognise  the  resolutions,  on  the  ground 
that  they  were  in  conflict  with  the  Constitu- 
tion. 

In  order  to  give  an  idea  of  the  effect  of 
these  Volksraad  resolutions,  I  quote  the  fol- 
lowing instance  from  Oom  Paul's  People^ 
the  author  of  which,  Mr.  Howard  C.  Hille- 
gas,  is  a  strong  Boer  sympathiser :  "  A 
61 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

man  named  Dums,  whose  big  farm  on  the 
border  became  British  territory  through  a 
treaty,  sued  the  Transvaal  Government  for 
damages.  Whereupon  the  Raad  passed  a  law 
that  Dums  could  never  sue  the  Government 
for  anything.  Another  man  sued  the  Gov- 
ernment for  damages  for  injuries  resulting 
from  a  fall  in  the  street.  He  was  successful 
in  his  suit ;  but  the  Raad  immediately  there- 
after passed  a  law  making  it  impossible  for 
any  person  to  sue  the  Government  for  inju- 
ries received  on  public  property." 

The  most  flagrant  case  of  this  kind  was 
the  action  of  the  Government  in  regard  to 
the  proclamation  of  the  farm  Witfontein  as 
a  gold-field.  The  Government  issued  a 
proclamation  to  the  effect  that  on  a  certain 
day  and  at  a  certain  hour  Witfontein  would 
be  thrown  open  for  pegging  claims.  There 
was  a  rush  to  the  place;  and  the  Govern- 
ment, instead  of  sending  a  force  of  police  to 
preserve  order,  issued  an  illegal  notice  with- 
drawing the  proclamation,  and  declaring  that 
the  claims  would  be  given  out  by  lottery. 
Many  prospectors  had  already  laid  out  their 
claims,  and  these  men  informed  the  Govern- 
ment that  they  intended  to  sue  for  their 
rights  in  the  Courts.  Immediately  the  Raad 
62 


GRIEVANCES  OF  UITLANDERS 

passed  a  law  to  the  effect  that  any  claim  for 
damages  would  be  illegal,  and  that  the  Gov- 
ernment was  absolved  from  all  responsibility 
in  regard  to  their  action  in  the  circum- 
stances. It  was  in  connection  with  this 
episode  that  the  High  Court  crisis  of  1897 
arose.  One  of  the  men  who  had  pegged 
claims  was  an  American  named  Brown. 
He  sued  the  Government  for  his  rights 
under  the  proclamation.  But,  whilst  the 
case  was  pending,  the  Volksraad  passed  the 
law  stating  that  no  claims  could  lie  against 
the  Government  in  this  matter.  The  Chief 
Justice  of  the  Transvaal  decided  that  this 
law  was  in  conflict  with  the  Constitution, 
and  gave  judgment  in  favour  of  Brown. 
President  Kruger  immediately  introduced  a 
new  law  empowering  him  to  demand  from 
all  the  judges  an  assurance  that  they  would 
not  ever  again  question  the  constitutionality 
of  any  resolution  passed  by  the  Volksraad, 
and  giving  the  President  the  authority  to 
dismiss  from  the  bench  any  judge  who 
declined  to  give  such  assurances.  The 
judges  thereupon  closed  the  Courts,  declar- 
ing that  it  was  impossible  to  administer  jus- 
tice under  such  coercion.  One  of  the 
judges,    Mr.    Gregorowski,    stated    that    no 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

honourable  man  could  possibly  sit  on  the 
bench  of  the  High  Court  as  long  as  Law  i 
of  1897  w^s  ^"  force.  President  Kruger 
then  agreed  to  a  compromise:  if  the  judges 
would  refrain  for  a  while  from  exercising 
their  right  of  declaring  a  law  unconstitu- 
tional, the  President  would  introduce,  as 
speedily  as  possible,  a  law  guaranteeing  the 
independence  of  the  Courts.  This  was  ac- 
cepted by  the  judges.  But,  as  time  passed 
and  no  such  law  was  introduced  by  the 
President,  the  Chief  Justice  wrote  and  with- 
drew his  pledge.  President  Kruger  imme- 
diately dismissed  the  Chief  Justice  and  one 
of  the  other  judges,  and  appointed  Mr.  Greg- 
orowski  as  Chief  Justice.  The  law  under 
which  Mr.  Gregorowski  had  stated  it  to  be 
impossible  for  an  honourable  man  to  sit  on 
the  bench  was  still  in  force  when  that 
gentleman  accepted  the  Chief-Justiceship. 

In  connection  with  the  High  Court  crisis 
it  must  be  noted  that  the  President  has  fre- 
quently treated  the  decisions  of  the  Court 
with  contempt.  Two  instances  are  given 
by  Mr.  Fitzpatrick  in  his  The  Transvaal 
from  Within.  An  educated  East  Indian, 
named  Rachman,  a  British  subject,  in  fol- 
lowing   a   strayed    horse,  trespassed   on    the 

64 


GRIEVANCES  OF  UITLANDERS 

farm  of  one  of  the  members  of  the  Volks- 
raad.  He  was  arrested  and  charged  with  in- 
tent to  steal,  tried  by  the  brother  of  the 
owner  of  the  farm,  and  sentenced  to  receive 
twenty-five  lashes  and  to  pay  a  fine,  the 
same  sentence  being  inflicted  on  his  Hotten- 
tot servant,  who  was  with  him.  Rachman 
protested,  and  entered  an  appeal,  in  which 
he  stated  the  Fieldcornet  had  exceeded  his 
powers  in  giving  lashes,  and  offering  security 
of  £4.0  pending  the  hearing  of  the  appeal. 
His  protests  were  disregarded,  and  he  was 
flogged.  He  appealed  to  the  Circuit  Court, 
and  obtained  a  judgment  with  heavy  damages 
against  the  Fieldcornet.  President  Kruger 
shortly  afterwards  refunded  the  amount  of 
the  damages  to  the  Fieldcornet,  on  the 
ground  that,  as  he  had  acted  in  his  oflicial 
capacity,  he  should  be  protected.  Another 
case  was  that  of  a  native,  named  April,  who 
worked  with  a  Boer  farmer  for  some  years 
on  the  promise  that  he  should  receive  as 
payment  a  certain  number  of  cattle.  When 
the  term  of  service  was  out,  April  applied 
for  his  cattle  and  a  permit  to  leave  the  farm. 
The  farmer,  however,  refused  to  let  him  go, 
and  forcibly  retained  him  and  his  family. 
April  appealed    to  the  nearest  Fieldcornet,  a 

65 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

man  named  Prinsloo,  who  acted  in  such  an 
outrageous  manner  that,  when  the  case  sub- 
sequently came  up  for  trial  before  the  Chief 
Justice  that  official  said  that  Prinsloo's  con- 
duct had  been  brutal  in  the  extreme  and  a 
flagrant  breach  of  power,  perpetrated  with 
the  object  of  establishing  slavery.  April  ob- 
tained judgment  with  all  costs  against  Prins- 
loo.  "  Within  a  few  days  of  this  decision 
being  arrived  at,"  says  Mr.  Fitzpatrick,  "  the 
President,  addressing  a  meeting  of  burghers, 
publicly  announced  that  the  Government  had 
reimbursed  Prinsloo,  adding,  '  Notwithstand- 
ing the  judgment  of  the  High  Court,  we 
consider  Prinsloo  to  have  been  right.'  " 

An  excellent  example  of  the  difficulties 
under  which  the  gold  industry  has  to  labour 
is  the  Pass  Law.  This  law  was  drawn  up 
by  General  Joubert,  with  the  assistance  and 
advice  of  the  Chamber  of  Mines,  in  1894. 
It  may  be  mentioned  that  one  of  the  chief 
objects  of  the  law  was  to  facilitate  the 
handling  of  the  large  numbers  of  natives 
who  come  to  work  in  the  mines.  By  means 
of  the  pass  issued  to  each  labourer  it  was 
possible  to  keep  track  of  the  men,  and  thus 
to  reduce  the  number  of  undetected  crimes 
committed  at  the  mines.  After  the  law  had 
66 


GRIEVANCES  OF  UITLANDERS 

been  drafted,  it  was  allowed  to  stand  over  for 
nearly  two  years ;  and,  when  at  length  it 
was  passed  by  the  Raad,  the  Government 
neglected  to  create  the  department  for  the 
carrying  out  of  the  law.  But,  although  no 
department  was  created,  and  although  the 
law  was  thus  inoperative,  a  chief  of  the  im- 
aginary department  was  appointed,  at  a 
handsome  salary.  The  man  who  was  ap- 
pointed to  the  post  was  a  brother  of  one  of 
the  members  of  the  Executive  Council,  and 
he  had  been  dismissed  from  an  office  two 
years  previously  for  failure  to  clear  himself 
of  serious  charges  which  had  been  brought 
against  him. 

The  Aliens  Expulsion  Law  I  have  re- 
ferred to  in  an  earlier  chapter,  in  connection 
with  the  question  of  suzerainty.  As  this 
law  provided  that  any  person,  not  a  burgher, 
could  be  expelled  from  the  country  or  forced 
to  live  in  a  specified  location,  on  the  mere 
authority  of  the  President  and  the  Executive 
Council,  without  any  charge  being  made  that 
the  person  so  expelled  had  broken  any  law 
of  the  Republic,  and  as  such  person  was  to 
have  no  right  of  appeal  to  the  Courts  against 
such  an  arbitrary  decision,  the  law  was 
clearly  a  breach  of  the  London  Convention, 

67 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

the  Fourteenth  Article  of  which  says,  "  All 
persons,  other  than  natives,  conforming 
themselves  to  the  laws  of  the  Republic, 
will  have  full  liberty,  with  their  families,  to 
enter,  travel,  or  reside  in  any  part  of  the 
South  African  Republic."  It  will  be  seen 
at  once  that  the  only  condition  under  which 
this  full  right  of  residence  was  conferred 
was  that  the  person  claiming  the  right  must 
conform  to  the  laws  of  the  Republic. 

The  municipal  grievances  of  the  Uit- 
landers  centre  around  the  failure  of  President 
Kruger  to  keep  his  promise  of  conferring  mu- 
nicipal government  on  Johannesburg.  Con- 
cerning this  the  great  petition  signed  by 
21,684  British  subjects,  which  was  pre- 
sented to  Her  Majesty  in  March,  1899, 
says  :  "  The  promises  made  by  the  President 
with  regard  to  conferring  municipal  govern- 
ment on  Johannesburg  were,  to  outward  ap- 
pearance, kept ;  but  it  is  an  ineffective 
measure,  conferring  small  benefit  upon  the 
community  and  investing  the  inhabitants 
with  but  little  additional  power  of  legislating 
for  their  own  municipal  affairs.  Of  the  two 
members  to  be  elected  for  each  ward,  one, 
at  least,  must  be  a  burgher.  Besides  this, 
the  burgomaster  is  appointed  by  the  Govern- 
68 


GRIEVANCES  OF  UITLANDERS 

ment,  not  elected  by  the  people.  The  burg- 
omaster has  a  casting  vote,  and,  considering 
himself  a  representative  of  the  Government, 
and  not  of  the  people,  has  not  hesitated  to 
oppose  his  will  to  the  unanimous  vote  of  the 
Councillors.  The  Government  also  possesses 
the  right  to  veto  any  resolution  of  the  Coun- 
cil. As  the  burghers  resident  in  Johannes- 
burg were  estimated  at  the  last  census  at 
1,039  in  number  as  against  23,503  Uitland- 
ers,  and  as  they  belong  to  the  poorest  and 
most  ignorant  class,  it  is  manifest  that  these 
burghers  have  an  undue  share  in  the  repre- 
sentation of  the  town,  and  are  invested  with 
a  power  which  neutralises  the  efforts  of  the 
larger  and  more  intelligent  portion  of  the 
community.  Every  burgher  resident  is  qual- 
ified to  vote,  irrespective  of  being  a  rate- 
payer or  property  owner  within  the  municipal 
area." 

The  educational  grievances  of  the  Uit- 
landers  may  be  briefly  summed  up  thus : 
Faking  the  year  1895  as  an  example,  we 
find  that  the  amount  spent  on  education  by 
the  South  African  Republic  was  ;£"63,ooo. 
Of  this  sum  at  least  ;^50,ooo  was  contrib- 
uted by  the  Uitlanders.  Of  the  total  sum 
^62,350   was    spent    on    the    education    of 

69 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

7,508  Boer  children  and  ;^650  on  7,090 
Uitlander  children.  In  other  words  and  in 
round  figures,  $^0  was  spent  on  each  Boer 
child  and  only  45  cents  on  each  Uitlander 
child. 

Notwithstanding  the  fact  that  a  large  num- 
ber of  the  Boers  themselves  are  anxious  to 
have  their  children  instructed  in  English,  the 
Government  insists  that  Dutch  be  taught  for 
one  hour  a  day  in  the  first  year,  two  hours  a 
day  during  the  second  year,  three  hours  a 
day  during  the  third  year,  and  that  in  the 
fourth  year  Dutch  shall  become  the  sole 
medium  of  instruction.  In  order  to  avoid 
irritating  and  prolonged  discussion  with  the 
Government  in  regard  to  education,  the  peo- 
ple of  Johannesburg  offered  to  raise  a  fund 
of  ;^2,ooo,ooo  for  the  purpose  of  establish- 
ing schools  for  the  Uitlander  population. 
The  Government,  however,  looked  with  dis- 
favour on  the  scheme,  and  placed  many  ob- 
stacles in  the  way,  with  the  result  that, 
although  something  has  been  done,  every 
step  has  to  be  carried  out  in  the  face  of  the 
hostility  of  the  authorities. 

The  complaints  filed  by  British  subjects  at 
the  office  of  Her  Majesty's  agent  at  Pretoria, 
describing  outrages  on  their  persons  and  prop- 
70 


GRIEVANCES  OF  UITLANDERS 

erty,  are  too  numerous  to  permit  of  extended 
examination.  I  select  one  or  two  as  being 
typical  of  the  rest.  The  facts  are  such  as 
are  set  forth  in  the  affidavits  accompanying 
each  complaint. 

A  widow  named  Caroline  Lingveldt  com- 
plained that  on  the  night  of  Oct.  29,  1899, 
Fieldcornet  Lombaard  and  a  number  of  other 
men  knocked  at  the  door  of  her  house,  and 
threatened  to  kick  it  open  if  she  did  not  at 
once  admit  them.  The  men  were  in  search 
of  the  woman's  son,  who,  it  was  alleged,  had 
no  pass.  What  occurred  after  the  house  had 
been  entered  I  give  in  the  words  of  the  de- 
ponent :  "  Another  man,  long  and  stout, 
whose  name  I  do  not  know,  came  then  into 
the  house,  and  pulled  the  blanket  ofF  the  bed 
on  which  my  daughter  Caroline,  aged  sixteen, 
was  lying,  and  did  the  same  to  the  bed  in 
which  were  Mabel  Blommenstein  and  my 
little  nephew.  The  night  was  cool.  After 
having  looked  under  the  bed  and  behind  a 
screen,  the  man  went  out.  My  boy  was 
taken  to  prison  because  he  had  no  pass. 
Since  then  I  have  bailed  him  out  for  £2^ 
which  was  returned  to  me  on  his  acquittal. 
Mabel  Blommenstein  was  nine  years  old,  and 
I  boarded   and   lodged   her.     This  little  girl 

71 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

Mabel  became  suddenly  ill  later  in  the  night, 
having  been  frightened  at  the  noise  and  ex- 
citement. .  .  .  She  had  to  go  to  the  hospi- 
tal, and  has  since  died  there.  I  annex  a 
certificate  of  Dr.  Croghan  as  to  the  cause 
of  her  death."  The  certificate  states  :  "  On 
Sunday  morning,  October  30  last,  I  was 
called  to  attend  Mabel  van  Blommenstein. 
She  was  suffering  from  an  attack  of  acute 
pneumonia,  and  was  in  a  very  excited  and 
nervous  condition.  This  condition  is  not 
usually  associated  with  pneumonia,  but  was, 
in  my  opinion,  produced  by  fright  and  shock. 
She  died  in  the  Johannesburg  Hospital  on 
Tuesday,  the  15th  November;  and  I  have 
no  hesitation  in  stating  that  her  illness  was 
aggravated  by  exposure  to  night  air  and  ex- 
citement, previous  to  my  attendance.  Edw. 
H.  Croghan,  M.D." 

Another  typical  case  is  that  of  James 
Harris,  a  cab-driver,  a  British  subject  born 
in  Cape  Town.  He  stated  on  oath  :  "  On 
Monday  last  I  went  to  the  Pass  Office  to 
get  a  pass.  The  official  in  charge  told  me 
that  the  place  was  too  full,  and  that  I  must 
come  the  next  day.  Accordingly,  yesterday 
afternoon  about  three  o'clock  I  went  again. 
The  official  asked  me  for  my  pass,  to  which 

72 


GRIEVANCES  OF  UITLANDERS 

I  replied  that  I  had  not  one.  I  told  him 
that  I  had  only  been  here  a  fortnight,  and 
showed  him  my  cab  license.  Thereupon  I 
was  arrested  and  taken  to  the  Charge  Office 
for  about  an  hour,  and  then  I  was  taken 
round  to  the  Bree  Street  Charge  Office. 
Then  I  was  released  on  bail,  which  I  found 
myself.  This  morning  I  appeared  before 
the  third  Landdrost,  and  was  fined  £1  or 
fourteen  days.  The  fine  I  paid.  I  was  not 
asked  whether  I  pleaded  guilty  or  not  guilty, 
nor  were  the  merits  of  my  case  gone  into  in 
any  way." 

The  two  facts  which  stand  out  most  prom- 
inently in  the  above  cases,  and  in  the  large 
number  of  similar  cases,  are  that  the  police 
of  Johannesburg  make  a  habit  of  forcibly 
entering  the  houses  of  peaceable  British  resi- 
dents, without  warrant,  and  that  British  sub- 
jects are  continually  punished  by  the  Boer 
magistrates  without  any  form  of  trial  being 
gone  through  and  without  an  opportunity  of 
defence  being  afforded  them. 

But  the  most  serious  instances  of  outrages 
on  British  subjects  were  the  murders  of  Mrs. 
Appelbe  and  of  Tom  Jackson  Edgar.  Lit- 
tle need  be  added  in  regard  to  the  former  to 
the  statement  made  by  the  secretary  of  the 

73 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

Wesleyan  Missionary  Society  in  the  following 
letter :  — 

Wesleyan  Mission  House, 
BisHOPGATE  Street  Within,  London, 
May  8,  1899. 

To  THE  Secretary  of  State  for  the 
Colonies  : 
*S*/r, —  On  behalf  of  the  Wesleyan  Mis- 
sionary Society  I  beg  to  bring  under  your 
notice  the  following  most  distressing  occur- 
rence. On  Friday,  April  28,  Mrs.  Appelbe, 
the  wife  of  the  Rev.  R.  F.  Appelbe,  Wes- 
leyan missionary,  residing  at  Fordsburg,  Jo- 
hannesburg, in  the  South  African  Republic, 
was  going  to  church,  when  she  was  set  upon 
by  some  miscreants,  European  or  native  is 
not  yet  clearly  known,  but  probably  native, 
and  so  brutally  treated  that  she  died  from  her 
injuries  on  the  Tuesday  following.  Mrs. 
Appelbe  was  the  daughter  of  John  Holder, 
Esq.,  J.  P.,  of  Folkestone;  and  her  terrible 
death  has  not  only  caused  sorrow  and  misery 
to  her  husband  and  friends,  but  has  also 
caused  alarm  and  indignation  throughout  our 
church  in  the  Transvaal  and  in  this  country. 
A  correspondent,  recently  returned  from  Jo- 
hannesburg, and  who  has  lived  there  for 
some  time,  declares  that  the  Boer  policemen 

74 


GRIEVANCES  OF  UITLANDERS 

and  officials  are  useless  for  the  purposes  of 
detection  and  punishment  of  crime.  Under 
these  circumstances,  and  for  the  protection 
of  our  missionaries  and  their  families,  I  have 
the  honour  to  request,  respectfully  and  ear- 
nestly, that  instructions  may  be  given  to  the 
representative  of  Great  Britain  in  the  South 
African  Republic  to  make  rigorous  and 
searching  inquiry  into  this  terrible  and  most 
painful  case.  I  have,  etc., 

William  Perkins, 
Secretary  Wesley  an  Missionary  Society. 

The  murder  of  Mrs.  Appelbe  in  daylight, 
and  on  a  public  highway,  shows  the  insecu- 
rity of  life  in  Johannesburg,  notwithstanding 
the  enormous  revenue  collected  from  the 
Johannesburg  people.  And  the  fact  that  no 
arrests  have  been  made  in  connection  with 
the  murder  casts  some  light  on  the  efficiency 
of  the  Boer  police. 

The  facts  in  the  Edgar  case  are,  however, 
still  more  deplorable.  According  to  the  evi- 
dence submitted  at  the  trial  of  the  murderer, 
Edgar  was  walking  home  one  evening,  and, 
when  nearing  his  house,  he  met  two  men, 
with  one  of  whom  he  had  a  quarrel.  He 
knocked   the   man    down   with   his    fist,  and 

75 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

then  continued  on  his  way  home.  The  man 
was  not  seriously  injured.  After  Edgar  had 
been  in  his  house  for  a  few  minutes,  a 
policeman,  named  Barend  Stephanus  Jones, 
assisted  by  others,  broke  open  the  door  of 
Edgar's  house ;  and,  as  soon  as  Edgar  came 
forward,  Jones  drew  a  revolver,  and  shot  him 
dead,  his  body  falling  into  the  arms  of  his 
wife,  who  was  beside  him. 

Jones  then  ran  away,  but  was  subsequently 
arrested  on  a  charge  of  murder.  He  was 
immediately  released  on  giving  bail  for 
;£^200,  the  same  amount  as  had  been  exacted 
a  few  days  previously  from  an  Uitlander 
charged  with  common  assault.  The  charge 
of  murder  was  subsequently  reduced  to  that 
of  culpable  homicide.  On  this  charge  Jones 
was  acquitted,  the  judge  who  summed  up 
the  case  informing  the  jury  that  the  only 
point  to  be  considered  was  whether  the 
police  were  acting  in  the  execution  of  their 
duty  when  they  broke  open  the  door  of 
Edgar's  house.  If  the  jury  thought  that  they 
were,  he  said,  they  would  of  course  bring  in 
a  verdict  of  not  guilty.  The  case  was 
closed  by  the  judge  informing  the  accused 
that  he  agreed  with  the  verdict  of  the  jury, 
and  that  he  hoped  the  police,  under  difficult 

76 


GRIEVANCES  OF  UITLANDERS 

circumstances,  would  always  know  how  to 
do  their  duty. 

The  murder  of  Edgar  caused  great  excite- 
ment throughout  the  Republic,  and  led,  in- 
cidentally, to  the  outrage  known  as  the 
"  Amphitheatre  Case/'  Shortly  after  the 
murder  occurred,  a  petition  was  got  up, 
setting  forth  the  facts  and  appealing  to  Her 
Majesty  for  protection.  This  petition  was 
signed  by  about  five  thousand  British  sub- 
jects. It  was  decided  that  the  signatories 
of  the  petition  should  go  in  a  mass  to  the 
office  of  the  British  vice-consul  at  Johannes- 
burg, and  present  the  document  to  him. 
The  crowd  collected  in  the  streets ;  and  an 
Englishman,  named  Webb,  who  was  in  a 
carriage,  called  to  the  people  to  go  to  the  vice- 
consul's  office.  When  they  arrived  there, 
another  Englishman,  a  Mr.  Dodd,  read  the 
petition  aloud  from  the  balcony  of  the  vice- 
consulate.  The  petition,  for  certain  reasons, 
into  which  it  is  not  necessary  to  enter,  was 
not  forwarded  to  Her  Majesty. 

Soon  after  the  petition  had  been  presented 
to  the  vice-consul,  Messrs.  Webb  and  Dodd 
were  arrested  for  having  organised  an  illegal 
meeting,  the  Government  holding  that  the 
calling  out  of  directions  to  go  to  the  vice- 

77 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

consul's  and  the  reading  of  the  petition  con- 
stituted breaches  of  the  Public  Meetings 
Law.  The  men  were  released  on  bail  of 
^i,ooo  each,  a  sum  five  times  as  great  as 
that  required  from  the  murderer  of  Edgar. 

This  arbitrary  act  served  to  still  further 
inflame  the  Johannesburg  people,  and  it  was 
decided  to  hold  a  public  meeting  of  protest 
in  the  Amphitheatre.  The  Public  Meetings 
Law  permits  the  holding  of  meetings  in 
enclosed  buildings,  whilst  forbidding  open- 
air  gatherings.  In  order  to  avoid  any  mis- 
understanding, one  of  the  organisers  of  the 
meeting  went  to  the  State  Secretary  and  to 
the  State  Attorney  of  the  Republic,  and, 
after  explaining  clearly  that  the  objects  of  the 
proposed  meeting  were  to  protest  against  the 
arrest  of  Messrs.  Dodd  and  Webb,  to  con- 
demn the  Public  Meetings  Act,  and  to  in- 
dorse a  petition  to  Her  Majesty,  he  was 
told  that,  although  the  objects  of  the  meet- 
ing were  distasteful  to  the  Government,  there 
was  no  legal  objection  to  the  meeting,  and 
that  therefore  it  would  not  be  prohibited. 

The  following  description  of  the  meeting 
is  taken  from  a  letter  addressed  to  Mr. 
Conygham  Greene,  Her  Britannic  Majesty's 
agent    at    Pretoria,    by    Mr.   W.    Wybergh, 

78 


GRIEVANCES  OF  UITLANDERS 

President  of  the  South  African  League. 
Mr.  Wybergh's  account  of  the  affair  is  sub- 
stantiated by  twenty-six  sworn  statements. 
These  affidavits  may  be  found  in  extenso 
in  British  Blue  Book  C.  9345  of  1899, 
pp.  160-175. 

"  As  a  proof  of  the  peaceful  objects  of  the 
meeting  and  of  our  intention  to  avoid  any- 
thing in  the  nature  of  rioting,  I  may  here 
mention  that  ladies  were  invited  to  attend, 
and  that  a  considerable  number  actually  did 
so.  The  British  subjects  who  attended 
were,  also,  entirely  unarmed.  Further,  it 
had  originally  been  intended  to  hold  the 
meeting  at  8  p.m.  ;  but,  although  this  would 
have  insured  a  much  larger  attendance  of 
our  supporters,  we  altered  the  hour  to 
4  P.M.,  with  the  express  object  of  avoiding 
the  presence  of  any  noisy  or  otherwise  unde- 
sirable element,  and  of  being  able  to  recog- 
nise clearly  any  disturber  of  the  meeting. 
Of  this  proceeding,  and  of  some  of  the  rea- 
sons for  it,  I  informed  the  State  Attorney  at 
our  interview.  I  will  now  describe  shortly 
what  occurred  at  the  meeting. 

*'  The  meeting  took  place  in  a  large  wood 
and  iron  building  known  as  the  Amphi- 
theatre, generally  used   for  circuses  and  sim- 

79 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

ilar  public  entertainments.  Before  the  ad- 
vertised time  of  the  meeting  the  side  doors 
were  forced  by  a  large  body  of  Boers,  police 
in  plain  clothes  and  Government  officials, 
numbering  several  hundreds.  These  people 
were  all  armed,  some  with  sticks,  iron  bars, 
and  police  batons,  and  some  with  revolvers. 
The  main  body  took  up  a  position  immedi- 
ately below  the  platform.  Other  smaller  but 
organised  bodies  of  Boers  distributed  them- 
selves throughout  the  building,  and  the  re- 
mainder of  the  space  was  filled  with  quiet 
and  orderly  British  subjects.  As  soon  as  the 
Committee  appeared  on  the  platform  and  the 
chairman  began  to  address  the  meeting, 
the  Boers  and  police,  under  the  leadership 
of  Mr.  Broeksma,  the  third  Public  Prose- 
cutor, and  other  well-known  men,  began  to 
make  an  uproar.  It  was  clearly  evident  that 
the  mob  was  acting  under  the  orders  of  rec- 
ognised leaders,  who  gave  them  orders  by 
preconcerted  signals.  While  the  chairman 
was  speaking,  a  determined  attempt  was  made 
to  storm  the  box  reserved  for  the  ladies ;  but 
this  was  fortunately  frustrated.  The  brutal 
and  outrageous  object  of  this  attempt,  as 
well  as  its  organised  character,  will  fully 
appear  from  the  accompanying  affidavits. 
So 


GRIEVANCES  OF  UITLANDERS 

"  On  account  of  the  uproar  the  chairman 
was  compelled  to  cut  short  his  address ;  and 
at  a  signal  given  by  the  leaders  of  the  Boers 
a  large  body  of  police  in  plain  clothes,  armed 
with  their  batons,  started  the  riot  by  forcing 
their  way  to  and  fro  across  the  building, 
using  their  batons  freely  upon  any  British 
subjects  they  came  across.  Simultaneously 
the  large  body  of  Boers  in  front  of  the  plat- 
form, under  the  leadership  of  Government 
officials,  and  smaller  bodies  scattered  through- 
out the  building,  began  to  lay  about  them 
with  sticks  and  iron  bars.  As  soon  as  this 
began,  several  members  of  the  Committee 
and  others  sought  the  protection  of  the  po- 
lice in  uniform,  who  were  drawn  up  in  order 
outside  the  building  ;  but  their  request  was  re- 
fused. Numbers  of  British  subjects  there- 
upon sought  the  permission  of  the  chairman 
to  defend  themselves ;  but  the  chairman, 
remembering  his  promise  to  the  Transvaal 
Government,  and  observing,  moreover,  that 
many  of  the  police  were  armed  with  revol- 
vers and  only  waited  for  an  opportunity  to 
use  them,  refused  permission,  and  called  on 
all  British  subjects  to  go  quietly  home. 

''  As  soon  as,  upon  the  request  of  the 
chairman,  the  building  became  a  little  more 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

empty,  and  the  audience  had  partly  dispersed, 
the  Boers  and  police,  again  led  and  instigated 
by  Government  officials,  began  to  break  all 
the  furniture  and  to  use  the  fragments  as 
weapons.  The  broken  furniture  was  piled 
up  in  the  middle  of  the  building,  and  an 
attempt  was  made  to  set  the  whole  on  fire. 
Meanwhile  numerous  appeals  had  been  made 
to  Commandant  Van  Dam,  the  chief  of 
police,  and  to  other  members  of  the  police 
force,  to  arrest  men  in  the  act  of  rioting; 
but  they  refused. 

"  Although,  fortunately,  no  lives  were  lost, 
a  great  many  serious  and  dangerous  assaults 
were  committed  by  the  police  and  officials 
upon  British  subjects,  for  which  it  appears 
hopeless  for  the  aggrieved  parties  to  demand 
compensation.  Throughout  the  riot  the 
police  on  duty  fraternised  with  the  mob, 
and  even  before  all  the  British  subjects  had 
left  the  Amphitheatre  this  sympathy  was 
most  openly  expressed  ;  and  the  police  shook 
hands  with  the  mob,  and  congratulated  them. 
Two  lieutenants  of  police  were  carried 
shoulder-high  by  the  rioters  without  any  ex- 
pression of  disapproval  by  the  commandant. 
And,  when  it  was  all  over,  Mr.  Boshof,  the 
Registrar  of  the  second  Criminal  Court,  ad- 
82 


GRIEVANCES  OF  UITLANDERS 

dressed  the  mob,  and  said,  '  Men,  you  have 
all  done  your  duty  splendidly :  now  you  may 
go  home,'  or  words  to  that  effect." 

It  only  remains  to  add  that  the  British 
Government  asked  the  Government  of  the 
South  African  Republic  to  institute  an  in- 
quiry into  the  proceedings  at  the  Amphi- 
theatre meeting,  and  that  this  request  was 
met  by  a  flat  refusal. 

I  pass  now  to  the  political  grievances  of 
the  Uitlanders.  First,  a  word  as  to  the  polit- 
ical condition  of  the  Uitlander.  In  1885 
the  revenue  of  the  South  African  Republic 
was  ;^ 1 62,709.  This  was  before  there  was 
any  considerable  Uitlander  population.  In 
1899  the  revenue  had  risen  to  ;^4,o87,852. 
'Of  this  sum  more  than  ;^3, 250,000  came 
out  of  the  pockets  of  the  Uitlanders.  Yet 
these  men,  who  pay  more  than  three-quarters 
of  the  taxes,  are  not  permitted  to  have  any 
voice  in  the  disposition  of  this  vast  sum  of 
money.  As  a  direct  cause  of  this,  the  tax- 
payers are  compelled  to  put  up  with  what- 
ever kind  of  government  ^he  small  body  of 
practically  untaxed  Boers  care  to  give  them. 
The  country  is  ruled  to  a  considerable  extent 
by  means  of  arbitrary  resolutions  of  the  Ex- 
ecutive Council  -y  but,  even  when  the  ordinary 

83 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

course  of  legislation  is  pursued,  the  legislative 
body  is  one  elected  entirely  by  Boers,  and  the 
majority  of  the  tax-payers  are  absolutely  un- 
represented. 

This  great  injustice  may  be  looked  at  from 
three  different  standpoints.  First,  although 
nothing  is  said  in  the  Convention  of  1884 
about  enabling  the  British  residents  in  the 
Transvaal  to  renounce  their  British  citizen- 
ship and  become  burghers  of  the  Republic 
on  reasonable  conditions,  the  British  Gov- 
ernment had  every  reason  to  believe  that 
such  facilities  would  be  provided  ;  and,  in 
fact,  the  Convention  was  signed  in  that 
belief.  This  is  apparent  from  the  nature  of 
the  discussion  which  preceded  the  signing 
of  the  Convention  of  1881,5^  Part  ^^  ^^^^ 
discussion  was  as  follows  :  —    jpu^>ti^/«P^  V^ 

"  Sir  H.  Robinson. —  Before  annexation, 
had  British  subjects  complete  freedom  of 
trade  throughout  the  Transvaal  ?  Were  they 
on  the  same  footing  as  citizens  ? 

"  Mr.  Kruger. —  They  were  on  the  same 
footing  as  burghers.  There  was  not  the 
slightest  difference  in  accordance  with  the 
Sand  River  Convention. 

"Sir  H.  Robinson. —  I  presume  you  will 
not  object  to  that  continuing  ? 

84 


GRIEVANCES  OF  UITLANDERS 

"Mr.  Kruger. —  No,  there  will  be  equal 
protection  for  everybody. 

"  Sir  E.  Wood. —  And  equal  privileges  ? 

"Mr.  Kruger. —  We  make  no  difference 
as  far  as  burgher  rights  are  concerned. 
There  may,  perhaps,  be  some  slight  differ- 
ence in  the  case  of  a  young  person  who  has 
just  come  into  the  country." 

A  few  days  later,  at  a  subsequent  meeting, 
Dr.  Jorrisen,  one  of  the  Transvaal  delegates, 
corrected  Mr.  Kruger's  answer  to  Sir  E. 
Wood,  Mr.  Kruger  being  present  at  the 
time.  He  said  :  "  What  Mr.  Kruger  in- 
tended to  convey  was  this  :  According  to  our 
law  a  new-comer  has  not  his  burgher  rights 
immediately.  The  words  '  young  person ' 
do  not  refer  to  age,  but  to  the  time  of  resi- 
dence in  the  Republic.  According  to  our 
Constitution  you  have  to  reside  a  year  in 
the  country." 

But,  as  the  British  Government  has  never 
demanded  the  franchise  for  the  Uitlanders  as 
a  right  under  the  Convention,  we  may  leave 
this  point,  and  pass  to  the  second  aspect  of 
the  matter. 

Now,  apart  from  any  specified  agreements, 
the  right  of  the  tax-payer  to  representation 
is  one  which  has  been  recognised  by  all  civ- 

85 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

ilised  countries,  with  the  exception  of  Russia. 
This  right  is  granted,  not  only  in  republics, 
all  of  which,  with  the  exception  of  the  South 
African  Republic,  are  founded  and  maintain 
their  existence  on  this  very  principle,  but 
also  in  all  the  European  monarchies.  It 
may  be  said  that  the  demands  of  the  Uit- 
landers  to  have  a  share  in  the  Government 
of  the  country  of  which  they  form  the  finan- 
cial backbone  has  the  sanction  of  universal 
consent. 

But,  lastly,  even  if  we  leave  out  of  the 
question  all  assertion  of  specific  or  general 
right,  we  see  that  the  Uitlander  tax-payer 
must  have  the  franchise,  because  it  is  an 
absolute  physical  impossibility,  in  point  of 
fact,  to  take  a  hundred  thousand  English- 
speaking  white  men  and  place  them  perma- 
nently in  a  position  of  political  and  economic 
servitude  to  seventy-five  thousand  Boers. 

It  must  not  be  overlooked  that  a  con- 
siderable body  of  the  Boers  realise  this,  and 
that  many  of  them  are  in  favor  of  granting 
the  franchise,  on  reasonable  terms,  to  the 
Uitlanders. 

In  August,  1895,  a  petition  signed  by 
35,483  Uitlanders  was  laid  before  the  Volks- 
raad,  praying  that  political  representation 
86 


GRIEVANCES  OF  UITLANDERS 

might  be  granted  to  the  law-abiding  Uit- 
lander  population.  Whilst  it  is  true  that 
one  member  of  the  Volksraad  made  a  speech 
when  the  matter  came  up,  declaring  that,  if 
the  Uitlanders  wanted  any  rights,  they  had 
better  come  on  and  fight  for  them,  other 
members,  notably  Mr.  Jeppe,  strongly  ad- 
vised the  government  to  accede  to  the  peti- 
tion. In  the  course  of  a  brilliant  speech 
Mr.  Jeppe  said  :  "  Who  are  the  people  who 
now  demand  from  us  a  reasonable  extension 
of  the  franchise  ?  There  are,  to  begin  with, 
almost  a  thousand  old  burghers  who  consent 
to  such  extension.  There  are,  in  addition, 
890  petitioners,  also  old  burghers,  who  com- 
plain that  the  franchise  has  been  narrowed  by 
recent  legislation.  There  are  5,100,  chiefly 
from  the  Rand,  who  ask  for  extension  sub- 
ject to  the  ballot,  the  principle  of  which  has 
already  been  adopted  by  you  ;  and  there  is 
lastly  a  monster  petition  bearing  thirty-five 
thousand  names,  chiefly  from  the  Rand  gold 
fields.  And,  in  passing,  I  may  mention  that 
I  have  convinced  myself  that  the  signatures 
to  it,  with  very  few  exceptions,  perhaps,  are 
undoubtedly  genuine. 

"Well,  this  petition  has  been,  practically, 
signed  by  the  entire  population  of  the  Rand. 

87 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

There  are  not  three  hundred  persons  of  any 
standing  whose  names  do  not  appear  there. 
It  contains  the  name  of  the  millionaire  capi- 
talist on  the  same  page  as  that  of  the  carrier 
or  miner;  that  of  the  owner  of  half  a  district 
next  to  that  of  a  clerk ;  and  the  signature  of 
the  merchant  who  possesses  stores  in  more 
than  one  town  of  this  Republic  next  to  that 
of  the  official.  It  embraces  also  all  national- 
ities. The  German  merchant,  the  doctor 
from  Cape  Town,  the  English  director,  the 
teacher  from  the  Paarl, —  they  have  all  signed 
it.  So  have  —  and  that  is  significant  —  old 
burghers  from  the  Free  State,  whose  fathers, 
with  yours,  reclaimed  this  country.  And  it 
bears,  too,  the  signatures  of  some  who  have 
been  born  in  this  country,  who  know  no  other 
fatherland  than  this  Republic,  but  whom  the 
law  regards  as  strangers.  Then,  too,  there 
are  the  new-comers.  They  have  settled  for 
good.  They  have  built  Johannesburg,  one  of 
the  wonders  of  the  age,  now  valued  at  many 
millions  sterling,  and  which  in  a  few  short 
vears  will  contain  from  a  hundred  to  a  hun- 
dred and  fifty  thousand  souls.  They  own 
half  the  soil,  they  pay  at  least  three-quarters 
of  the  taxes.  Nor  are  they  persons  who  be- 
long to  a  subservient  race.  They  come  from 
88 


GRIEVANCES  OF  -UITLANDERS 

countries  where  they  freely  exercised  politi- 
cal rights,  which  can  never  be  long  denied 
to  free-born  men.  They  are,  in  short,  men 
who  in  capital,  energy,  and  education,  are  at 
least  our  equals.  All  these  persons  are  gath- 
ered together,  thanks  to  our  law,  into  one 
camp.  Through  our  own  act,  this  multitude, 
which  contains  elements  which  the  most 
suspicious  amongst  us  would  not  hesitate  to 
trust,  is  compelled  to  stand  together,  and  so 
to  stand  in  this  most  fatal  of  all  questions 
in  antagonism  to  us.  Is  that  fact  alone  not 
sufficient  to  warn  us,  and  to  prove  how  un- 
statesmanlike  our  policy  is  ? 

"  What  will  we  do  with  them  now  ? 
Shall  we  convert  them  into  friends,  or  shall 
we  send  them  away  empty,  dissatisfied,  im- 
bittered  ?  What  will  our  answer  be  ?  Dare 
we  refer  them  to  the  present  law,  which,  first, 
expects  them  to  wait  for  fourteen  years,  and 
even  then  pledges  itself  to  nothing,  but  leaves 
everything  to  a  Volksraad  which  cannot 
decide  until  1905  ?  It  is  a  law  which  denies 
all  political  rights  even  to  their  children  born 
in  this  country.  Can  they  gather  any  hope 
from  that  ? 

"  Well,  should  we  resolve  now  to  refuse 
this  request,  what  will  we  do  when,  as  we 

89 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

well  know  must  happen,  it  is  repeated  by 
two  hundred  thousand  one  day.  You  will 
all  admit  that  the  doors  must  be  opened. 
What  will  become  of  us  or  our  children  on 
that  day,  when  we  shall  find  ourselves  in  a 
minority  of  perhaps  one  in  twenty,  without 
a  single  friend  amongst  the  other  nineteen, 
amongst  those  who  will  then  tell  us  they 
wished  to  be  brothers,  but  we  by  our  own 
act  made  them  strangers  to  the  Republic  ? 
Old  as  the  world  is,  has  any  attempt  like 
ours  ever  succeeded  for  long  ?  Shall  we 
say,  as  a  French  king  did,  that  things  will 
last  our  time,  and  after  that  we  reck  not 
the  deluge  ?  Again  I  ask.  What  account  is 
to  be  given  to  our  descendants,  and  what 
can  be  our  hope  in  the  future  ? " 

With  this  clear  and  convincing  statement 
from  a  man  who  is  a  Boer  and  a  member  of 
the  Volksraad,  I  leave  the  question  of  the 
political  grievances  of  the  Uitlanders. 


90 


CHAPTER   V. 

The  Jameson  Raid  was  one  of  the  most 
unfortunate  events  that  has  ever  happened  in 
South  Africa.  Had  the  Uitlanders  already 
risen  in  revolt,  the  whole  affair  would  have 
taken  on  a  different  aspect ;  for,  if  with  the 
aid  of  Jameson  and  his  men  the  Uitlanders 
had  succeeded  in  overthrowing  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  Republic,  the  revolt  and  the 
incursion  would  have  risen  to  the  plane  of  a 
revolution,  and  its  success  would  have  been 
its  justification. 

As  things  turned  out,  however,  the  Raid 
had  all  the  appearance  of  an  act  of  foreign 
aggression  ;  and  the  world  at  large,  in  sympa- 
thising with  President  Kruger,  naturally 
failed  to  remember  that,  outrageous  as  the  act 
appeared,  it  was  the  outcome  of  certain  intol- 
erable wrongs  suffered  by  the  Uitlanders,  and 
that  the  existence  of  these  wrongs  was  not 
in  any  way  affected  by  the  doing  of  another 
wrong  by  a  third  party.  Another  unfortu- 
nate effect  of  the  Raid  was  to  create  a  wide 
impression  during  the  time  when  the  Uit- 
lander  grievances  were  under  discussion  in 
1899  that  the  grievances  were  in  a  large 
measure    the   result   of  the   Raid ;    whereas, 

91 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  grievances  were  its 
cause.  In  a  similar  manner  it  is  generally 
thought  that  the  excessive  armaments  of  the 
Boers  proceeded  from  a  just  fear  inspired 
by  the  Raid,  the  truth  being  that  the  arm- 
ing of  the  Boer  population  by  the  Govern- 
ment at  the  expense  of  the  Uitlanders  v^as 
one  of  the  contributing  causes  to  the  Jo- 
hannesburg rising. 

But  the  vi^orst  feature  of  the  Raid,  as  far 
as  public  opinion  in  Europe  and  in  America 
was  concerned,  was  this,  that  it  gave  to  the 
Johannesburg  reform  movement  the  appear- 
ance of  an  attempt  to  bring  the  South  African 
Republic  under  the  British  flag, —  in  other 
words,  to  destroy  the  independence  of  the 
Republic.  Nothing  could  be  further  from 
the  facts,  as  will  readily  be  seen  from  the 
following  account  of  the  Raid  and  the  cir- 
cumstances surrounding  it. 

In  regard  to  the  minor  details  of  the  Raid, 
there  exists  a  considerable  conflict  of  testi- 
mony; but  the  broad  facts  as  here  stated 
represent  the  affair  as  it  is  set  forth  by  a 
majority  of  eye-witnesses,  and  as  it  appears 
in  the  evidence  laid  before  the  Jameson  Raid 
Committee  of  the  House  of  Commons.  In 
all  essentials  this  account  agrees  with  that  of 
92 


THE  JAMESON  RAID 

Mr.  J.  P.  Fitzpatrick,  as  given  in  his  The 
Transvaal  from  IVithin, 

The  reform  movement  which  eventually 
led  to  the  Raid  was  originated  and  carried  on 
by  a  body  called  the  Transvaal  National 
Union.  It  was  composed  almost  entirely  of 
workingmen  and  mechanics ;  and  until  with- 
in a  few  weeks  of  the  outbreak  the  capitalists 
and  mine-owners  viewed  the  Union  with  dis- 
favour, preferring,  somewhat  selfishly,  to  ac- 
cept the  disadvantages  of  bad  government, 
which  did  not  weigh  so  heavily  on  them  as 
on  their  subordinates,  to  the  great  risks  in- 
volved in  antagonising  the  Goverment  by 
continued  agitation. 

For  some  years  earnest  attempts  were 
made  by  the  Union  to  secure  redress  for 
the  many  grievances  suffered  by  the  popula- 
tion of  the  Rand  by  means  of  representa- 
tions and   petitions  to  the   Government. 

The  American  inhabitants  of  Johannes- 
burg made  an  especial  attempt  on  their  own 
account  to  influence  President  Kruger  in  the 
direction  of  reform  ;  but  their  eflTorts  were 
futile.  After  hearing  what  a  deputation  of 
Americans  had  to  say,  he  asked  them,  "If 
a  crisis  should  occur,  on  which  side  shall  I 
find  the  Americans  ?  "     The  deputation  re- 

93 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

plied, "  On  the  side  of  liberty  and  good 
government."  The  President  answered, 
"  You  are  all  tarred  with  the  same  brush : 
you  are  British  in  your  hearts." 

As  time  passed,  however,  and  it  became 
evident  that  the  yoke,  instead  of  becoming 
lighter,  was  being  made  heavier  day  by  day, 
it  was  decided  that  the  only  hope  of  reform 
lay  in  an  exhibition  of  force,  which,  even  if 
it  did  not  actually  end  in  a  revolution,  would 
bring  home  to  the  Boer  Government  the 
great  danger  of  its  continued  policy  of  op- 
pression. 

Before  any  steps  were  taken  in  this 
direction,  a  final  effort  was  made  to  influence 
the  Government  by  constitutional  agitation ; 
and  a  monster  petition,  signed  by  35,700 
Uitlanders,  was  laid  before  the  Volksraad. 
It  was  rejected  with  laughter  and  ridicule. 
^'  If  the  Uitlanders  want  any  rights,"  said 
one  member,  "  let  them  come  and  fight  for 
them." 

At  length,  it  was  decided  that  an  attempt 
must  be  made  to  overthrow  the  Kruger  Gov- 
ernment by  force.  In  order  clearly  to  define 
the  causes  and  objects  of  the  proposed  revo- 
lution, the  National  Union  issued  a  manifesto 
in  which  were  set  forth  the  grievances  of  the 

94 


THE  JAMESON  RAID 

Uitlanders,  the  constitutional  steps  which 
had  been  taken  to  secure  their  redress,  the 
failure  of  all  such  attempts,  and  the  exact 
scope  of  the  revolutionary  movement.  The 
manifesto  is  too  long  to  be  given  here  in  full. 
Its  closing  sentences  are  these  :  — 

"  Why  should  the  Government  endeavour 
to  keep  us  in  subjection  to  unjust  laws  by  the 
power  of  the  sword  instead  of  making  them- 
selves live  in  the  heart  of  the  people  by  a 
broad  policy  of  justice  ?  What  can  be  said 
of  a  policy  which  deliberately  divides  the  two 
great  sections  of  the  people  from  each  other 
instead  of  uniting  them  under  equal  laws,  or 
of  the  policy  which  keeps  us  in  eternal  tur- 
moil with  the  neighbouring  States  ?  What 
shall  be  said  of  the  state-craft,  every  act  of 
which  sows  torments,  discontent,  or  race 
hatred,  and  reveals  a  conception  of  Republi- 
canism under  which  the  only  privilege  of  the 
majority  of  the  people  is  to  provide  the  rev- 
enue, and  to  bear  the  insult,  while  only  those 
are  considered  Republicans  who  speak  a  cer- 
tain language  and  in  a  greater  or  less  degree 
share  the  prejudices  of  the  ruling  classes  ? 

"  I  think  this  policy  can  never  succeed 
unless  men   are    absolutely   bereft    of   every 

95 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

quality  which  made  their  forefathers  free 
men,  unless  we  have  fallen  so  low  that  we 
are  prepared  to  forget  honour,  self-respect, 
and  our  duty  to  our  children.  Once  more 
I  wish  to  state  again  in  unmistakable  lan- 
guage what  has  been  so  frequently  stated  in 
perfect  sincerity  before,  that  we  desire  an 
independent  Republic  which  shall  be  a  true 
Republic,  in  which  every  man  who  is  pre- 
pared to  take  the  oath  of  allegiance  to  the 
State  shall  have  equal  rights,  in  which  our 
children  shall  be  brought  up  side  by  side  as 
united  members  of  a  strong  commonwealth ; 
that  we  are  animated  by  no  race  hatred, 
that  we  desire  to  deprive  no  man,  be  his 
nationality  what  it  may,  of  any  right. 

"We  want:  (i)  The  establishment  of 
this  Republic  as  a  true  Republic ;  (2)  A 
Grondwet,  or  Constitution,  which  shall  be 
framed  by  competent  persons  selected  by 
representatives  of  the  whole  people  and 
framed  on  lines  laid  down  by  them, —  a 
Constitution  which  shall  be  safeguarded 
against  hasty  alteration ;  (3)  An  equitable 
franchise  law  and  fair  representation ;  (4) 
Equality  of  the  Dutch  and  English  languages ; 
(5)  Responsibility  to  the  legislature  of  the 
heads  of  the  great  departments  5  (6)  Re- 
96 


THE  JAMESON  RAID 

moval  of  religious  disabilities ;  (7)  Inde- 
pendence of  the  courts  of  justice,  with 
adequate  and  secured  remuneration  to  the 
judges;  (8)  Liberal  and  comprehensive  edu- 
cation ;  (9)  Efficient  civil  service,  with 
adequate  provision  for  pay  and  pension ; 
(10)  Free  trade  in  South  African  products. 
That  is  what  we  want.  There  now  remains 
the  question  which  is  to  be  put  before  you 
at  the  meeting  of  the  6th  of  January ;  viz., 
How  shall  we  get  it  ?  To  this  question  I 
shall  expect  from  you  an  answer  in  plain 
terms  according  to  your  deliberate  judg- 
ment. Charles  Leonard. 

Chairman  of  the  Transvaal  National  Union.  ^^ 

Towards  the  end  of  1895  urgent  repre- 
sentations were  made  to  the  capitalists  of 
the  Rand,  with  the  result  that  a  few  weeks 
before  the  rising  occurred  most  of  these  men, 
who  had  hitherto  held  aloof  from  the  move- 
ment, seeing  that  things  had  reached  the 
breaking  strain,  threw  in  their  lot  with  the 
reformers.  Mr.  Cecil  Rhodes  was  approached 
with  a  request  that  he  would  allow  the 
forces  of  the  South  African  Chartered  Com- 
pany to  concentrate  near  the  border  of  the 
Republic,  in   the  first    instance   to  afford   a 

97 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

moral  support  to  the  revolutionists,  and 
finally,  should  the  Johannesburgers  get  into  a 
tight  place,  to  come  to  their  assistance.  To 
this  Mr.  Rhodes  consented ;  and  he  gave 
the  necessary  orders  to  Dr.  Jameson,  the 
Administrator  of  the  Chartered  Company's 
Territories. 

Dr.  Jameson  went  to  Johannesburg,  and 
discussed  the  whole  matter  with  the  leaders. 
The  following  plan  was  adopted.  The 
Johannesburg  people  were  to  smuggle  in  five 
thousand  rifles,  three  Maxim  guns,  and  a 
million  rounds  of  ammunition.  Dr.  Jame- 
son was  to  get  together  a  force  of  fifteen 
hundred  mounted  men  with  some  Maxims 
and  field  artillery,  and  was  further  to  bring 
with  him  fifteen  hundred  spare  rifles.  A 
final  appeal  was  to  be  made  to  the  Govern- 
ment ;  and,  if  this,  as  was  feared,  should 
prove  futile,  Johannesburg  was  to  rise. 
The  first  thing  would  be  to  seize  the  Pretoria 
fort,  which  contained  ten  thousand  rifles,  a 
dozen  field  pieces,  and  twelve  million  rounds 
of  ammunition,  and  was  very  poorly  guarded. 
It  was  hoped  that,  with  the  Pretoria  fort  in 
the  hands  of  the  reformers,  with  Dr.  Jameson 
on  the  border,  and  with  five  thousand  armed 
men  in  Johannesburg,  the  revolution  could 
98 


THE   JAMESON    RAID 

be  effected  without  any  actual  fighting ;  and 
that  the  Government  of  the  Republic  would, 
in  order  to  avert  civil  war,  grant  those  rights 
which  it  had  refused  to  petition. 

Before  leaving  Johannesburg  in  Novem- 
ber, 1895,  Dr.  Jameson  was  handed  a  letter 
signed  by  the  leaders  of  the  movement. 
This  letter  dealt  briefly  with  the  condition 
of  affairs,  and  concluded  thus  :  "  It  is  under 
these  circumstances  that  we  feel  constrained 
to  call  upon  you  to  come  to  our  aid,  should 
a  disturbance  arise  here.  The  circumstances 
are  so  extreme  that  we  cannot  but  believe 
that  you  and  the  men  under  you  will  not  fail 
to  come  to  the  rescue  of  people  who  will 
be  so  situated.  We  guarantee  any  expense 
that  may  be  reasonably  incurred  by  you  in 
helping  us,  and  ask  you  to  believe  that 
nothing  but  the  sternest  necessity  has 
prompted  this  appeal." 

The  letter  was  left  undated,  and  was  in- 
tended merely  for  use  in  justifying  Dr. 
Jameson  in  the  eyes  of  those  to  whom  he 
was  responsible.  Dr.  Jameson  was  in- 
formed most  emphatically  that  he  was  on 
no  account  to  act  on  this  letter  alone,  but 
that  he  was  to  wait  for  a  farther  letter, 
which   would   be  sent   him,  before   he  made 

99 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

any  attempt  to  enter  the  Republic  with  his 
forces.  It  was  hoped  that  his  presence  on 
the  border  would  be  sufficient,  and  that  no 
further  letter  would  have  to  be  sent.  At  any 
rate,  he  was  solemnly  urged  not  to  move 
unless  and  until  he  received  a  positive 
request  from  Johannesburg. 

Things  stood  thus  when,  about  the  middle 
of  December,  1895,  the  Johannesburger  re- 
formers learned  that  Mr.  Cecil  Rhodes  had 
failed  to  understand  the  stipulation  made  in 
connection  with  calling  in  of  Dr.  Jameson : 
namely,  that  no  attempt  was  to  be  made  to 
overthrow  the  Republic  as  such,  and  to 
bring  it  under  the  British  flag,  but  that  the 
independence  of  the  Republic  was  to  be 
maintained ;  and  that  he  looked  upon  this 
simply  as  talk  for  publication.  As  soon  as 
this  became  known,  a  number  of  the  leaders 
threatened  to  withdraw  altogether  from  the 
movement  unless  positive  assurances  should 
be  given  by  Mr.  Cecil  Rhodes  that,  in  allow- 
ing Dr.  Jameson  to  take  part  in  the  revo- 
lution if  he  were  called  on,  he  would 
absolutely  abandon  any  idea  that  the  Jo- 
hannesburger people  would  attempt  to  bring 
the  country  under  the  Union  Jack. 

These  assurances  were  given.     But  in  the 


THE   JAMESON   RAID 

meanwhile,  owing  to  the  failure  to  secure 
arms  and  for  other  reasons,  it  was  decided 
by  the  reformers  that  an  entirely  new  plan 
of  campaign  must  be  adopted.  Accordingly, 
two  trusty  messengers.  Major  Heany  and 
Captain  Holden,  were  sent  off  to  Dr.  Jame- 
son, one  by  special  train  and  the  other  on 
horseback,  carrying  the  most  positive  in- 
structions that  no  movement  was  to  be 
made.  These  messages  were  delivered  to 
Dr.  Jameson  in  person. 

Notwithstanding  these  messages  and  a 
number  of  urgent  telegrams,  Dr.  Jameson 
took  the  bit  between  his  teeth ;  and  on  Sun- 
day, Dec.  29,  1895,  he  started  over  the 
border  with  583  men,  all  told,  under  the 
command  of  Lieutenant  Colonel  Sir  John  C. 
VVilloughby.  This  action  destroyed  all 
chance  of  success  for  the  Johannesburgers. 
In  the  words  of  Mr.  J.  P.  Fitzpatrick,  "The 
reformers  realised  perfectly  well  the  full  sig- 
nificance of  Dr.  Jameson's  action.  They 
realised  that,  even  if  he  succeeded  in  reach- 
ing Johannesburg,  he  by  taking  the  initiative 
seriously  impaired  the  justice  of  the  Uit- 
landers'  cause, —  indeed,  put  them  hopelessly 
in  the  wrong.  Apart  from  the  moral  or 
political  aspects  of  the  question,  there  was 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

the  fact  that,  either  through  mistake  or  by 
fatuous  impulse,  Dr.  Jameson  had  plunged 
them  into  a  crisis  for  which,  as  he  knew, 
they  were  insufficiently  provided  and  pre- 
pared, and  at  the  same  time  destroyed  the 
one  chance,  the  one  certainty,  on  which 
they  had  always  counted  for  arms  and  am- 
munition. By  starting  first,  he  knocked  out 
the  foundation  of  the  whole  scheme :  he 
made  the  taking  of  the  Pretoria  arsenal 
impossible." 

As  soon  as  it  became  absolutely  certain 
that  Jameson  had  started,  the  Johannes- 
burgers  began  to  put  their  city  in  a  state  of 
defence.  The  more  prominent  men  organ- 
ised themselves  into  a  Reform  Committee, 
and  issued  the  following  proclamation : 
"  Notice  is  hereby  given  that  this  Committee 
adheres  to  the  National  Union  manifesto, 
and  reiterates  its  desire  to  maintain  the  inde- 
pendence of  the  Republic.  The  fact  that 
rumours  are  in  course  of  circulation  to  the 
effect  that  a  force  has  crossed  the  Bechuana- 
land  border  renders  it  necessary  to  take  active 
steps  for  the  defence  of  Johannesburg  and 
the  preservation  of  order.  The  Committee 
earnestly  desires  that  the  inhabitants  should 
refrain  from  taking  any  action  which  can  be 


THE  JAMESON  RAID 

considered  as  an  overt  act  of  hostility  against 
the  Government." 

Everybody  worked  with  a  will.  The  first 
necessity  was  to  organise  a  police  force,  as 
the  Boer  policemen  withdrew  from  the  town 
in  a  body.  This  was  done.  Then  a  de- 
fence force  was  got  together  and  placed 
under  competent  officers,  an  ambulance 
corps  was  formed,  and  a  Relief  Committee 
was  established  for  the  purpose  of  looking 
after  the  women  and  children  and  other  non- 
combatants.  This  Committee  was  supplied 
within  half  an  hour  of  its  formation  with  a 
fund  of  ;^8o,ooo,  which  was  used  in  housing 
and  feeding  the  women  and  children.  In 
order  to  insure  good  order,  the  Reform 
Committee  bought  up  all  the  liquor  in  the 
drinking-saloons  and    destroyed  it. 

Whilst  Jameson  was  advancing  towards 
Johannesburg,  two  proclamations  were  pub- 
lished. The  first  was  from  President 
Kruger.  It  was  as  follows  :  *'  Whereas  it 
has  appeared  to  the  Government  of  the 
South  African  Republic  that  there  are 
rumours'  in  circulation  to  the  efl^ect  that 
earnest  endeavours  are  being  made  to  en- 
danger the  public  safety  of  Johannesburg ; 
and  whereas    the  Government  is   convinced 

103 


*    THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

that,  in  case  such  rumours  may  contain  any 
truth,  such  endeavours  can  only  emanate 
from  a  small  portion  of  the  inhabitants,  and 
that  the  greater  portion  of  the  Johannesburg 
inhabitants  are  peaceful,  and  are  prepared  to 
support  the  Government  in  its  endeavours 
to  maintain  law  and  order, —  now  know  you 
that  I,  Stephanus  Johannes  Paulus  Kruger, 
State  President  of  the  South  African  Repub- 
lic, with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the 
Executive  Council,  do  hereby  warn  these 
evil-intentioned  persons  (as  I  do  hereby  urge 
all  such  persons  to  do)  to  remain  within  the 
pale  of  the  law,  and  all  such  persons  not 
heeding  this  warning  shall  do  so  on  their 
own  responsibility ;  and  I  do  further  make 
known  that  life  and  property  shall  be  pro- 
tected against  which  attempts  may  be  made, 
and  that  every  peaceful  inhabitant  of  Johan- 
nesburg, of -'whatsoever  nationality  he  may 
be,  is  called  on  to  support  me  herein,  and  to 
assist  the  officials  charged  therewith.  And, 
further,  be  it  made  known  that  the  Govern- 
ment is  still  prepared  to  take  into  considera- 
tion all  grievances  that  may  be  laid  before  it 
in  a  proper  manner,  and  to  submit  the  same 
to  the  people  of  the  land  without  delay  for 
treatment." 

104 


THE   JAMESON   RAID 

The  other  proclamation  was  from  Sir  ^ 
Hercules  Robinson,  High  Commissioner  of 
South  Africa,  and  ran  :  "  Whereas  it  has 
come  to  my  knowledge  that  certain  British 
subjects,  said  to  be  under  the  leadership  of 
Dr.  Jameson,  have  violated  the  territory  of 
the  South  African  Republic,  and  have  cut 
telepraph  wires  and  done  various  other  il- 
legal acts ;  and  whereas  the  South  African 
Republic  is  a  friendly  State,  in  amity  with 
Her  Majesty's  Government ;  and  whereas  it 
is  my  desire  to  respect  the  independence  of 
the  said  State, —  now,  therefore,  I  hereby  com- 
mand the  said  Dr.  Jameson,  and  all  persons 
accompanying  him,  to  immediately  retire 
from  the  territory  of  the  South  African  Re- 
public on  pain  of  the  penalties  attached  to 
their  illegal  proceedings ;  and  I  do  hereby 
further  call  upon  all  British  subjects  in 
the  South  African  Republic  to  abstain  from 
giving  the  said  Dr.  Jameson  any  counte- 
nance or  assistance  in  his  armed  violation  of 
the  territory  of  a  friendly  State." 

The  actual  fighting  between  the  Boers 
and  Dr.  Jameson's  force  deserves  no  special 
notice.  After  an  engagement,  which  occu- 
pied nearly  two  days.  Sir  John  Willoughby 
surrendered  to  Commandant  Cronje  at  9.15 
105 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

on  the  morning  of  January  2,  1896.  The 
force  surrendered  on  condition  that  the  lives 
of  all  would  be  spared,  provided  that  they  laid 
down  their  arms  and  guaranteed  to  pay  the 
expenses  incurred  in  connection  with  the 
raid. 

The  conditions  on  which  Dr.  Jameson 
surrendered  were  concealed  from  the  Johan- 
nesburgers,  and  the  threat  of  dealing  in  a 
summary  manner  with  the  captives  was 
used  by  President  Kruger  to  induce  the  Jo- 
hannesburgers  to  lay  down  their  arms.  In 
other  words,  although  President  Kruger 
knew  that,  under  the  terms  of  surrender,  he 
could  not  commit  any  act  of  violence  on  the 
persons  of  the  prisoners,  he  continually  led 
the  Reform  Committee  to  understand  that 
the  lives  of  Jameson  and  his  men  were  in 
the  hands  of  the  Johannesburgers,  thus  mak- 
ing it  impossible  for  them  to  refuse  the 
terms   he  offered. 

Sir  Hercules  Robinson,  the  High  Com- 
missioner of  South  Africa,  went  to  Pretoria 
to  assist  President  Kruger  in  setting  things 
straight ;  and  one  of  the  most  unaccountable 
things  in  connection  with  the  negotiations 
which  took  place  between  the  Reform  Com- 
mittee, Sir  Hercules  Robinson,  and  the  agents 
106 


THE   JAMESON   RAID 

of  the  South  African  Republic,  is  the  appar- 
ent entire  desertion  of  the  Uitlanders  by  the 
High  Commissioner.  This  may  be  best 
understood  by  reading  the  telegrams  and 
other  communications  addressed  by  Sir  Her- 
cules Robinson  to  the  Johannesburgers  and 
to  the  Colonial  Office.  First  we  have  a 
telegram  marked  "  urgent/*  addressed  to  the 
British  agent  in  Johannesburg :  "  You  should 
inform  the  Johannesburg  people  that  I  con- 
sider that,  if  they  lay  down  their  arms,  they 
will  be  acting  loyally  and  honourably,  and 
that,  if  they  do  not  comply  with  my  request, 
they  forfeit  all  claim  to  sympathy  from  Her 
Majesty's  Government  and  from  British 
subjects  throughout  the  world,  as  the  lives 
of  Jameson  and  the  prisoners  are  now  prac- 
tically in  their  hands."  From  this  we  see 
that  Sir  Hercules  Robinson  had  not  even 
taken  the  trouble  to  inquire  on  what  terms 
Jameson  had  surrendered.  The  next  tele- 
gram which  interests  us  is  one  to  Mr. 
Chamberlain,  dated  Jan.  7,  1896:  "I  need 
only  now  say  that  I  have  just  received  a 
message  from  Reform  Committee,  resolving 
to  comply  with  demand  of  South  African 
Republic  to  lay  down  their  arms ;  the  people 
placing  themselves  and  their  interests  unre- 
107 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

servedly  in  my  hands  in  the  fullest  confi- 
dence that  I  will  see  justice  done  them.  .  .  . 
I  hope  now  to  be  able  to  confer  with  the 
President  of  the  South  African  Republic  and 
Executive  Council  as  to  prisoners  and  the 
redress  of  Johannesburg  grievances."  On 
the  next  day  the  High  Commissioner  tele- 
graphed to  Mr.  Chamberlain  :  "  I  shall  try 
to-day  to  make  arrangements  with  Kruger  as 
to  taking  over  of  prisoners  ;  and  I  will  confer 
with  him  as  to  redressing  the  grievances  of 
the  residents  of  Johannesburg.  ...  I  intend, 
if  I  find  that  the  Johannesburg  people  have 
substantially  complied  with  the  ultimatum, 
to  insist  on  the  fulfilment  of  promises  as  re- 
gards prisoners  and  consideration  of  griev- 
ances." 

Surely,  after  these  repeated  assurances  the 
Johannesburgers  had  reason  to  believe  that 
their  grievances  would  be  considered.  But 
Sir  Hercules  Robinson,  as  soon  as  he  had 
arranged  about  the  delivery  of  Dr.  Jameson's 
force  to  the  British  authorities,  left  Pretoria 
without  even  discussing  the  grievances  with 
President  Kruger  or  making  any  attempt  to 
hold  the  latter  to  the  promises  contained  in 
his  proclamation  of  December  30. 

But  on  the  two  following  days,  Jan.  9 
108 


THE   JAMESON    RAID 

and  10,  1896,  about  sixty  members  of  the 
Reform  Committee  were  arrested  and  con- 
veyed to  Pretoria  ;  and  not  only  did  the  High 
Commissioner  fail  to  see  these  men  and  get 
their  account  of  the  circumstances  attending 
the  raid,  but  he  expressed  his  desire,  equiva- 
lent to  an  order,  to  the  British  Resident  that 
that  official  would  not  communicate  with  the 
prisoners  until  he  had  left  Pretoria.  But 
iMr.  Chamberlain  was  by  no  means  in  sym- 
pathy with  this  entire  neglect  to  deal  with 
the  grievances  which  were,  after  all,  the  cause 
of  the  whole  trouble ;  and  he  telegraphed 
to  Sir  Hercules  Robinson  on  January  15: 
"  The  people  of  Johannesburg  laid  down 
their  arms  in  the  belief  that  reasonable  con- 
cessions would  be  arranged  by  your  interven- 
tion ;  and,  until  these  are  granted  or  are 
definitely  promised  to  you  by  the  President, 
the  root-causes  of  the  present  troubles  will 
remain.  The  President  has  again  and  again 
promised  reform,  .  .  .  and  grave  dissatisfac- 
tion would  be  excited  if  you  left  Pretoria 
without  a  clear  understanding  on  these 
points.  Her  Majesty's  Government  invite 
President  Kruger,  in  the  interests  of  South 
African  Republic  and  of  peace,  to  make  a 
full  declaration  on  these  matters.  ...  It  will 
109 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

be  your  duty  to  use  firm  language,  and'  to 
tell  the  President  that  neglect  to  meet  the 
admitted  grievances  of  the  Uitlanders  by  giv- 
ing a  definite  promise  to  propose  reasonable 
concessions  would  have  a  disastrous  effect 
upon  the  prospects  of  a  lasting  and  satisfac- 
tory settlement." 

But  Sir  Hercules  Robinson  had  already 
left  Pretoria.  His  action  in  leaving  the  Re- 
public at  the  very  moment  w^hen  his  efforts 
might  have  been  so  profitably  turned  towards 
the  removal  of  the  grievances  which  had 
been  at  the  bottom  of  the  outbreak  can  have 
no  justification.  Reforms  which  might  have 
been  easily  arranged  then  were  not  even  dis- 
cussed :  the  Republic  was  treated  to  another 
exhibition  of  British  incompetence ;  and  Pres- 
ident Kruger  was  given  one  more  reason  to 
believe  that  he  could  continue  to  laugh  in 
security  at  the  attempts  of  Great  Britain  to  se- 
cure justice  for  her  subjects  in  the  Transvaal. 
As  a  contributing  cause  to  the  present  war, 
the  conduct  of  Sir  Hercules  Robinson  must 
be  set  down  by  the  side  of  Mr.  Gladstone's 
surrender  of  1881. 

Dr.  Jameson  and  his  ofiicers  were  sent  to 
England,  where  they  were  tried  under  the 
Foreign   Enlistments  Act,  and  sentenced  to 


THE   JAMESON    RAID 

various  terms  of  imprisonment.  It  would  be 
useless  to  describe  the  treatment  of  the 
members  of  the  Reform  Committee  after 
their  arrest,  to  tell  how  these  men,  a  large 
proportion  of  whom  were  men  of  refinement 
and  education,  were  herded  together  as 
though  they  were  the  lowest  of  black  felons ; 
how  one  prisoner,  suffering  from  fever  and 
dysentery,  was  locked  up  for  twelve  hours  in 
a  cell  nine  feet  long  by  five  feet  six  inches 
wide  with  four  other  men,  and  left  unpro- 
vided with  sanitary  provisions  of  any  kind ; 
how  by  means  of  liberal  bribes  the  prisoners 
at  last  secured  their  own  clothing  and  the 
right  to  purchase  food  outside  the  jail ;  or 
how  the  wives  and  sisters  of  the  prisoners 
were  kept  day  after  day  standing  for  hours 
outside  the  jail  waiting  until  the  jailer  should 
condescend  to  inspect  their  passes.  The 
story  is  too  painful  to  bear  repetition. 
Those  who  would  know  the  horrible  details 
of  that  imprisonment  should  read  Mr.  Fitz- 
patrick's  book  and  Mrs.  Lionel  Phillips's 
Some   South   African   Recollections, 

The  indictment  served  on  the  prisoners 
contained  four  counts:  (i)  That  they  had 
wrongfully,  unlawfully,  and  with  a  hostile 
intention    to    disturb,  injure,    or    bring    into 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

danger  the  independence  or  safety  of  the  Re- 
public, treated,  conspired,  agreed  with,  and 
urged  Leander  Starr  Jameson  ...  to  come 
into  the  territory  of  the  Republic  at  the  head 
of  and  with  an  armed  and  hostile  troop,  and 
to  make  a  hostile  invasion,  and  to  march 
through  to  Johannesburg.  (2)  That  they 
had  "  armed  troops  ready  to  assist,  and  sent 
assistance  to  him,  and  subsequently  by  sedi- 
tious speeches  made,  or  caused  to  be  made,  in 
public,  with  the  object  to  persuade  and  in- 
duce the  people  there  to  stand  by  the  afore- 
mentioned Jameson  in  his  hostile  invasion, 
and  further  assisted  him,  the  afore-mentioned 
Jameson,  during  his  hostile  invasion  above 
mentioned,  by  providing  him  with  provisions, 
forage,  and  horses.  (3)  That  they  had  dis- 
tributed arms,  had  enrolled  men,  had  formed 
military  companies,  and  had  erected  fortifica- 
tions. (4)  That  they  had  arrogated  to 
themselves  and  had  exercised  functions  and 
powers  belonging  to  the  Republic,  in  that 
they  organised  a  police  force,  appointed  a 
head  officer  of  the  force,  and  intrusted  him 
with  jurisdiction  in  police  cases. 

After  a  good  deal  of  discussion  between 
the  State  Attorney  of  the  South  African  Re- 
public and   Mr.  Wessels,  chief  advocate  for 


THE   JAMESON    RAID 

the  prisoners,  the  State  Attorney  offered  that, 
if  the  four  leaders,  Lionel  Phillips,  Francis 
Rhodes,  John  Hayes  Hammond,  and  George 
p^arrar,  would  plead  guilty  to  the  first  count, 
he  would  accept  a  plea  of  guilty  on  counts 
three  and  four  from  the  other  prisoners,  and 
that  he  would  not  press  for  an  exemplary 
sentence  against  the  leaders.  This  offer  was 
accepted  in  good  faith  by  the  prisoners.  In- 
stead of  allowing  the  cases  to  come  up  be- 
fore the  High  Court  in  the  ordinary  way,  the 
Government  imported  a  judge  from  the 
Orange  Free  State,  a  Mr.  Gregorowski,  who 
was  known  to  be  hostile  to  the  prisoners, 
who,  indeed,  had  boasted  before  he  arrived  at 
Pretoria  that  he  would  make  short  work  of 
the  rebels. 

The  trial  of  the  prisoners  was  in  some 
respects  one  of  the  most  remarkable  of  the 
century.  They  had  pleaded  guilty  by  ar- 
rangement with  the  State  Attorney,  who  had 
promised  that  in  consideration  of  the  plea  he 
would  not  press  for  exemplary  punishment. 
Accordingly,  no  evidence  was  heard  against 
the  prisoners.  The  plea  of  guilty  was  ac- 
cepted, and  the  prisoners'  counsel  made  an 
eloquent  appeal  to  the  judge.  At  the  con- 
clusion   of  this   address   the    State  Attorney 


THE  ANGLO-^BOER  CONFLICT 

rose,  and  in  a  most  violent  speech  demanded 
that  the  utmost  penalty  under  the  Roman- 
Dutch  law  —  that  is,  death  —  should  be 
passed  on  the  leaders.  I  continue  the  narra- 
tive in  the  words  of  Mr.  Fitzpatrick,  who 
was  present  at  the  trial :  "  The  usual  question 
as  to  whether  there  were  any  reasons  why 
sentence  of  death  should  not  be  passed  upon 
them  having  been  put  and  the  usual  reply  in 
the  negative  having  been  received,  in  the 
midst  of  silence  that  was  only  disturbed  by 
the  breaking  down  of  persons  in  various 
parts  of  the  hall  —  officials,  burghers,  and 
in  the  general  public  —  sentence  of  death 
was  passed,  first  on  Mr.  Lionel  Phillips, 
next  on  Colonel  Rhodes,  then  on  Mr. 
George  Farrar,  and  lastly  on  Mr.  Hammond. 
The  bearing  of  the  four  men  won  for  them 
universal  sympathy  and  approval,  especially 
under  the  conditions  immediately  following 
the  death  sentence,  when  a  most  painful 
scene  took  place  in  court.  Evidences  of 
feeling  came  from  all  parts  of  the  room  and 
from  all  classes  of  people, —  from  those  who 
conducted  the  defence  and  from  the  Boers 
who  were  to  have  constituted  the  jury. 
The  interpreter,  translating  the  sentence, 
broke    down.      Many  of   the  minor  officials 


■^NIVERsii 
THE   JAMESON   RAI]^^c>iL,pc>atj^ 


[jJJt^ 


lost  control  of  themselves ;  and  feelings  were 
further  strained  by  the  incident  of  one  man 
falling  insensible. 

"  Sentence  was  next  passed  upon  the 
other  prisoners.  They  were  condemned  to 
suffer  two  years'  imprisonment,  to  pay  a  fine 
of  ;^2,ooo  each,  or,  as  an  alternative,  sufFer 
another  year's  imprisonment,  and  thereafter 
to  be  banished  from  the  State  for  a  period  of 
three  years. .  .  .  After  passing  the  minor  sen- 
tences, the  judge  gave  a  short  address  to  the 
burghers,  in  which  he  thanked  them  for 
their  attendance,  and  made  allusion  with 
evident  signs  of  satisfaction  to  the 
manner  in  which  the  trial  had  been 
brought  to  a  conclusion.  A  long  delay 
followed,  during  which  the  judge  proceeded 
to  note  his  judgments.  Once  his  attention 
was  drawn  by  a  remark  of  an  official,  to 
which  he  replied  promptly,  at  the  same  time 
breaking  into  a  broad  smile,  but  suddenly 
recollecting  the  circumstances  and  the  pres- 
ence of  the  men  sentenced  to  death,  placed 
his  hand  over  his  mouth  and  wiped  the 
smile  away.  .  .  .  One  more  incident  —  trifling 
perhaps  in  itself,  but  leaving  an  ineffaceable 
impression — occurred  during  the  march  to 
the  gaol.     As  the  prisoners  slowly  approached 

115 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

the  Government  buildings,  Dr.  Leyds,  ac- 
companied by  one  friend,  walked  out  until 
within  a  few  yards  of  the  procession  of  sen- 
tenced men  (a  great  proportion  of  whom 
were  personally  known  to  him),  and  stood 
there  with  his  hands  in  his  pockets,  smiling 
at  them  as  they  went  past." 

The  life  of  the  prisoners  in  jail  was 
terrible.  Not  only  were  they  fed  like  Kaf- 
firs and  crowded  into  small  and  ill-venti- 
lated cells,  but  they  were  forced  to  witness 
the  flogging  and  torture  of  a  number  of 
native  prisoners.  One  man  broke  down 
under  the  strain,  and  committed  suicide. 

The  circumstances  under  which  the  pris- 
oners had  been  convicted,  and  the  treatment 
whilst  in  jail,  caused  a  wave  of  indignation 
to  sweep  over  the  whole  of  South  Africa. 
Representations  were  made  to  President 
Kruger  by  the  inhabitants  of  several  hun- 
dred towns  in  the  Cape,  in  Natal,  in  the 
Transvaal,  and  in  the  Orange  Free  State ;  and 
a  deputation  consisting  of  the  mayors  of  more 
than  two  hundred  towns  set  out  for  Pretoria 
with  the  purpose  of  prevailing  on  the  Presi- 
dent to  change  the  sentences.  Finally,  when 
the  pressure  of  public  sentiment  became  so 
strong  as  to  suggest  the  outbreak  of  another 
ii6 


THE   JAMESON   RAID 

revolt,  and  after  the  prisoners  had  been 
sounded  as  to  what  sums  they  were  prepared 
to  pay  for  their  liberty,  President  Kruger 
altered  the  sentences  to  a  fine  of  ;^25,ooo 
for  each  of  the  four  leaders  and  a  fine  of 
;^2,ooo  each  for  the  others.  The  total  sum 
paid  by  the  prisoners  to  the  South  African 
Republic  exceeded  ;^  1,000,000. 

Mr.  Chamberlain  informed  the  South 
African  Republic  that,  if  it  would  send  in  an 
account  of  the  damages  caused  by  the  Raid, 
he  would  call  on  the  South  African  Char- 
tered Company  to  pay  the  Republic  what- 
ever sums  had  been  expended  in  connection 
with  the  invasion.  In  reply  the  Republic 
presented  a  bill  for  ;£^i,677,938,  equal  to 
about  $8,000,000.  The  bill  was  divided 
under  two  heads, —  Material  Damages, 
;^677,938;  and  Moral  or  Intellectual  Dam- 
ages, ;^ 1, 000,000.  Mr.  Chamberlain  de- 
clined to  consider  the  claim  for  moral  and 
intellectual  damages,  and  asked  that  details  of 
the  expenditure  under  the  other  head  should 
be  furnished.  When  these  details  came  to 
hand,  it  was  found  that  many  of  the  items 
were  absurd.  For  instance,  ;^2,423,  equal 
to  ;^  1 2,000,  was  charged  for  shoeing  horses. 
This  claim  appears  ridiculous  in  view  of  the 
117 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

fact  that  the  Raid  only  occupied  four  days. 
Again,  £^yig^^  equal  to  ;g20,ooo,  was 
asked  for  carts  and  horses,  no  account  being 
taken  of  the  fact  that  these  supplies  re- 
mained  the   property   of  the  Republic. 

The  South  African  Chartered  Company, 
however,  expressed  its  readiness  to  pay  all 
expenses  for  which  vouchers  were  produced. 
The  vouchers  were  never  forwarded,  and 
there  the  matter  of  compensation  rests. 


ii8 


CHAPTER   VI. 

As  might  naturally  be  expected,  the  lot  of 
the  Uitlanders,  after  the  Jameson  Raid, 
became  harder  and  harder,  notwithstanding 
the  fact  that  President  Kruger  solemnly 
promised,  after  Jameson's  men  had  laid  down 
their  arms,  that  he  would  inquire  into  and 
redress  their  grievances.  At  length,  on 
March  24,  1899,  a  petition  signed  by  21,648 
Uitlanders  was  forwarded  by  the  High 
Commissioner  to  Her  Majesty,  praying  that 
she  would  intervene  to  secure  just  treatment 
for  the  British  Uitlanders. 

The  chief  grounds  for  the  petition  were 
stated  to  be :  the  failure  of  President  Kru- 
ger to  institute  the  reforms  promised  after 
the  Jameson  Raid  ;  the  continuation  of 
the  dynamite  monopoly  and  its  attendant 
grievances,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that 
a  government  commission,  consisting  of 
officials  of  the  Republic,  had  inquired  into 
the  matter  and  suggested  many  reforms; 
the  subjugation  of  the  High  Court  to  the 
executive  authority,  and  the  dismissal  of 
the  Chief  Justice  for  his  earnest  protest 
against  the  interference  with  the  Court's 
independence ;  the  selection  of  none  but 
119 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

burghers  to  sit  on  juries ;  the  aggressive 
attitude  of  the  police  towards  the  Uitlanders  ; 
the  continued  outrages  on  the  persons  and 
property  of  British  subjects ;  taxation  with- 
out representation ;  and  the  withholding  of 
educational  privileges  from  the  children  of 
Uitlanders.  These  grievances  I  have  dealt 
with  in  a  previous  chapter.  After  some 
correspondence  between  the  two  Govern- 
ments, and  a  friendly  suggestion  from  the 
President  of  the  Orange  Free  State,  a  con- 
ference was  arranged  between  Sir  Alfred 
Milner,  the  High  Commissioner  of  South 
Africa,  and  President  Kruger.  The  con- 
ference took  place  at  Bloomfontein,  the 
capital  of  the  Orange  Free  State,  and  lasted 
from  May  31  to  June  5.  I  have  before  me 
a  verbatim  report  of  the  proceedings. 

The  position  taken  by  Sir  Alfred  Milner 
was  that  there  were  a  number  of  open  ques- 
tions between  the  two  Governments,  which 
increased  in  importance  as  time  went  on, 
and  that  the  tone  of  the  controversy  was 
becoming  more  acute.  There  were  two 
methods  by  which  things  could  be  settled  : 
one  was  by  giving  the  Uitlanders  such  fair 
proportion  of  representation  in  the  first 
Volksraad    as   would   enable   them   to   work 


BLOOMFONTEIN   CONFERENCE 

out  gradually  the  needed  reforms ;  the  other, 
for  the  Government  of  Great  Britain  to 
adopt  that  course  which,  in  similar  circum- 
stances, would  be  adopted  in  regard  to  griev- 
ances of  British  subjects  in  any  country, 
even  in  a  country  not  under  specified  con- 
ventional obligations  to  Her  Majesty's  Gov- 
ernment,—  that  is,  by  raising  each  point 
separately,  and  showing  how  the  intense 
discontent  of  British  subjects  stood  in  the 
way  of  that  friendly  relation  which  it  was 
desired  should  exist  between  the  two  Gov- 
ernments. Of  these  two  methods.  Sir 
Alfred  Milner  thought  that  the  former 
would  be  the  better;  for  if  a  fair  franchise 
were  granted  to  the  Uitlanders  most  of  the 
questions  pending  between  the  two  Govern- 
ments could  be  dropped  as  specific  issues, 
and  the  remaining  ones  could  be  settled  by 
friendly  discussion.  If  he  could  persuade 
President  Kruger  to  grant  a  fair  franchise, — 
not  as  a  right  which  could  be  claimed  under 
the  Conventions,  but  as  a  concession  calcu- 
lated to  remove  serious  elements  of  discord, 
—  al/  that  was  needed  to  set  things  right 
would  then  be  effected  by  a  movement 
within  the  State,  the  danger  of  continual 
and   irritating   pressure   from   outside   would 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

be  removed,  and  the  independence  of  the 
Republic  would  be  strengthened.  Sir  Alfred 
Milner  pointed  out  that  the  existing  fran- 
chise law  compelled  an  alien,  after  renounc- 
ing allegiance  to  his  own  Government,  to 
wait  twelve  years  before  he  was  granted 
citizenship  in  the  Transvaal,  and  that  even 
then  there  was  much  uncertainty  whether  he 
would  get  the  franchise.  It  was  to  be  re- 
called that  those  men  who  had  come  into 
the  Republic  in  1886,  and  had  been  prom- 
ised citizenship  at  the  end  of  five  years, 
were  informed,  just  before  the  term  of  five 
years  ended,  that  the  law  had  been  changed, 
and  they  would  have  to  wait  seven  years 
longer. 

Sir  Alfred  Milner  then  proposed  that  the 
franchise  should  be  granted  to  every  white 
man  who  had  been  five  years  in  the  country, 
and  was  prepared  to  take  oath  to  obey  the 
laws,  to  undertake  all  the  obligations  of  citi- 
zenship, and  to  defend  the  independence  of 
the  country,  it  being  understood  that  by 
taking  such  an  oath  he  renounced  his  citi- 
zenship of  any  other  country.  A  property 
qualification  and  good  character  were  to  be 
conditions.  The  assertion  has  been  fre- 
quently made  that  Sir  Alfred   Milner  wished 


BLOOMFONTEIN   CONFERENCE 

to  secure  the  citizenship  of  the  Transvaal 
for  British  subjects  under  conditions  which 
would  still  allow  them  to  remain  British  sub- 
jects. 

This  statement  is  so  absurd  on  the  face 
of  it  that  it  seems  scarcely  to  deserve  notice. 
But,  as  it  has  been  so  persistently  repeafed,  I 
may  point  out  that  under  no  law  that  exists 
or .  ever  has  existed  in  any  country  can  a 
man  who  has  taken  an  oath  of  allegiance  to 
one  State  claim  at  the  same  time  citizenship 
of  another  State.  There  was,  it  is  true, 
some  discussion  as  to  the  exact  wording  of 
the  proposed  oath  of  allegiance ;  but  it  must 
be  remembered  in  this  connection  that  Sir 
Alfred  Milner  was  not  making  a  demand  for 
the  franchise,  but  merely  suggesting  to  Presi- 
dent Kruger  certain  conditions  under  which 
Great  Britain  would  be  prepared  to  abandon 
the  attempt  to  secure  redress  for  hundreds 
of  specific  grievances  suffered  by  British  sub- 
jects in  the  Republic.  He  did  not  say, 
"  You  must  give  me  oath  of  allegiance  of  a 
certain  kind,'*  but,  "  If  you  care  to  give  me 
an  oath  of  this  kind,  I  would  accept  it  as  a 
solution  of  the  difficulties  we  are  discuss- 
mg. 

In  order  to  leave  no  doubt  in  the  minds 
123 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

of  my  readers  as  to  what  Sir  Alfred  Milner 
proposed  in  regard  to  franchise,  I  quote  his 
exact  words  as  given  in  the  Transvaal  Green 
Book,  in  which  the  Bloomfontein  Confer- 
ence was  reported  :  — 

<«  Wednesday,  May  31,  1899. 
''  The  High  Commissioner, —  I  must  en- 
deavour to  make  my  position  clear  with 
regard  to  what  we  are  now  discussing,  for 
according  to  my  opinion  the  franchise  is  an 
important  part  of  the  subject.  I  object  to 
the  position  of  the  franchise  as  it  exists  at 
present,  and  that  utterly, —  particularly  to 
that  point  to  which  I  will  refer  first ; 
namely,  I  consider  it  unreasonable  to  ask  a 
man  to  forswear  citizenship,  when  he  does 
not  in  reality  get  anything  in  place  of  the 
rejected  allegiance.  And  I  consider  it  super- 
fluous to  demand  from  such  person  more 
than  an  oath  of  allegiance,  and  a  willingness 
to  obey  the  laws  and  to  defend  the  inde- 
pendence, as  it  is  well  known  and  certain 
that  the  taking  of  that  oath  robs  him  of  his 
then  existing  burghership." 

In  reply  to  this  proposal.  President  Kruger 
urged  that  the  Uitlanders  did  not  want  the 
franchise,   and    would    not    take    it    on   any 
124 


/a 


BLOOMFONTEIN   CONFERENCE 

terms  j  and,  also,  that,  if  he  granted  Sir 
Alfred  Milner's  request,  the  country  would 
be  controlled  by  foreigners,  and  all  power 
taken  from  the  old  burghers, —  propositions 
which  are  mutually  destructive.  But  on  the 
third  day  of  the  conference  President  Kruger 
himself  presented  a  new  franchise  proposal. 
This  was  passed  by  the  Volksraad  at  once, 
before  the  British  authorities  had  any  time  to 
examine  it.  After  it  was  published,  it 
appeared  on  its  very  face  so  full  of  intrica- 
cies that  its  effect  as  a  measure  of  reform 
was  a  matter  of  serious  doubt.  Under  its 
terms  an  alien  could  apparently  secure  the 
franchise  in  seven  years,  but  the  conditions 
were  so  complicated  that  to  fulfil  them  was 
impossible.  To  give  only  one  example  :  A 
man  who  desired  the  franchise  must  first 
signify  his  intention  in  writing  to  the 
Fieldcornet,  the  Landdrost,  and  the  State 
Secretary.  Two  years  later  he  might 
become  naturalised  (without  receiving  full 
burgher  rights),  provided  he  produced  a 
certificate,  signed  by  the  Fieldcornet,  the 
Landdrost,  and  the  commandant  of  the 
district,  to  the  effect  that  he  had  never 
broken  any  of  the  laws  of  the  Republic.  If 
these  officials  were  not  sufficiently  well- 
125 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

acquainted  with  the  private  life  of  the  appli- 
cant to  grant  such  a  certificate,  then  a 
sworn  statement  to  the  same  effect  from  two 
prominent  full  burghers  would  suffice.  At 
the  termination  of  another  five  years  the 
applicant,  having  six  months  previously  sig- 
nified his  intentions  in  writing  to  the  Field- 
cornet,  the  Landdrost,  and  the  State  Secre- 
tary, might  apply  for  the  full  franchise.  He 
must  then  furnish  the  certificate  alluded 
to  above.  This,  together  with  his  applica- 
tion, must  be  indorsed  by  the  Fieldcornet 
and  the  Landdrost.  Both  were  then  to  be 
passed  to  the  State  Secretary,  who  should 
hand  them  on  to  the  State  Attorney,  who 
should  return  them  with  a  legal  opinion  to 
the  State  Secretary.  If  the  opinion  were 
favourable,  the  man  might  be  granted  the  full 
franchise.  If  not,  the  matter  was  to  be  re- 
ferred to  the  Executive  Council. 

If  this  account  appears  involved,  I  can 
only  refer  my  readers  to  the  law  itself,  when 
it  will  be  seen  that  I  have  selected  for  ex- 
planation by  no  means  the  most  complicated 
conditions. 

It  must  be  noted  that  the  law  contains  no 
compelling  clauses.  Under  the  conditions 
set  forth  the  Uitlander  may  be  granted  the 
126 


AFTER   THE    CONFERENCE 

franchise.  Nowhere  does  the  law  say  that 
after  fulfilling  the  conditions  he  shall  have 
the  franchise.  It  is  all  left  finally  to  the 
mere  will  of  the  officials  charged  with  the 
carrying  out  of  the  law. 

In  view  of  the  opinion  expressed  by  Sir 
Alfred  Milner  and  prominent  Uitlanders, 
that  on  the  face  of  it  the  law  appeared 
almost  unworkable,  Mr,  Chamberlain  tele- 
graphed, asking  for  the  appointment  of 
delegates  from  the  Transvaal  and  from  the 
British  side  to  discuss  the  new  law,  to  see 
if  it  would,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  effect  the 
needed  reforms.  To  Mr.  Chamberlain's 
request  for  a  joint  inquiry  the  Transvaal 
Government  sent  a  reply  in  which  nothing 
was  said  about  the  joint  inquiry,  but  in 
which  a  proposal  was  made  for  a  new  fran- 
chise law.  The  basis  of  the  new  proposal 
was  a  five  years*  retrospective  franchise. 
The  following  conditions,  which  I  take 
verbatim  from  the  Transvaal  Government's 
official  translation  of  its  note,  were  attached  : 
The  proposals  of  this  Government  regarding 
questions  of  franchise  and  representation 
must  be  regarded  as  expressly  conditional 
on  Her  Majesty's  Government  consenting 
to  the  points  set  forth  in  paragraph  five  of 
127 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

that  despatch,  namely :  (a)  In  future  not  to 
interfere  in  internal  affairs  of  the  South  Afri- 
can Republic,  {b)  Not  to  insist  further  on 
its  assertion  of  existence  of  suzerainty,  {c) 
To  agree  to  arbitration.  Further,  it  was  ex- 
plicitly stated  by  the  State  Attorney  that 
these  offers  could  only  be  understood  to 
stand  if  England  decided  not  to  press  her 
request  for  a  joint  inquiry  into  the  political 
representation  of  the  Uitlanders.  There 
can  be  no  doubt  about  this  rejection  of  the 
joint  inquiry,  for  the  draft  of  the  telegram 
in  which  the  British  agent  conveyed  the 
suggestions  to  Sir  Alfred  Milner  was  ini- 
tialed by  the  State  Attorney  himself. 

In  reply,  Mr.  Chamberlain  said  he  was 
prepared  to  waive  the  joint  inquiry  if  the 
British  agent,  assisted  by  competent  men, 
should  be  allowed  to  investigate  the  terms 
of  the  proposal.  In  regard  to  intervention. 
Her  Majesty's  Government  hoped  that  the 
fulfilment  of  the  promises  made,  and  the 
just  treatment  of  the  Uitlanders  in  future, 
would  render  unnecessary  any  further  inter- 
vention on  their  behalf;  but  they  could  not, 
of  course,  debar  themselves  from  their  rights 
under  the  Conventions  nor  divest  themselves 
of  the  ordinary  obligations  of  a  civilised 
128 


AFTER   THE   CONFERENCE 

power  to  protect  its  subjects  in  a  foreign 
country  from  injustice.  As  to  the  suzer- 
ainty, the  condition  imposed  could  not  be 
accepted,  as  Her  Majesty's  Government 
were  of  opinion  that  the  contention  of  the 
South  African  Republic  to  be  a  sovereign  in- 
ternational State  was  not  warranted  either 
by  law  or  by  history,  and  was  entirely  inad- 
missible. In  reference  to  arbitration,  Mr. 
Chamberlain  agreed  to  the  discussion  of  the 
form  and  scope  of  such  a  tribunal,  and  sug- 
gested an  early  conference. 

The  Transvaal  replied  that  it  regretted 
the  refusal  of  Her  Majesty's  Government 
to  accept  the  conditions  annexed  to  the 
latest  franchise  proposals,  which  proposals 
it  now  withdrew.  The  Transvaal  having 
refused  the  joint  inquiry  into  the  working 
of  the  seven  years'  franchise  law,  nothing 
was  left  between  the  two  parties  but  Sir 
Alfred  Milner's  proposal  put  forth  at  Bloom- 
fontein.  However,  Mr.  Chamberlain  made 
one  more  effort  for  a  peaceful  settlement. 
In  a  despatch  dated  Sept.  9,  1899,  he 
stated  that  Her  Majesty's  Government  was 
still  willing  to  accept  the  Transvaal's  offer 
of  a  five  years'  franchise,  without  the  condi- 
tions attached  j  that  the  acceptance  of  this 
129 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

offer  would  at  once  remove  the  tension  be- 
tween the  two  Governments,  and  would  in 
all  probability  render  unnecessary  any  further 
intervention  on  the  part  of  Her  Majesty's 
Government  to  secure  the  redress  of  the 
Uitlander  grievances;  further,  that  such 
questions  as  remained  for  settlement  between 
the  two  Governments  —  those  which  were 
neither  Uitlander  questions  nor  questions  of 
interpretation  of  the  Conventions  —  might 
be  referred  to  a  tribunal  of  arbitration.  If 
the  answer,  however,  to  this  last  proposal 
was  negative  or  inconclusive,  Her  Majesty's 
Government  would  reserve  the  right  to  re- 
consider the  situation  de  novo^  and  to  for- 
mulate their  own  proposals  for  a  final  settle- 
ment. 

On  Sept.  22,  1899,  Mr.  Chamberlain 
telegraphed  to  Sir  Alfred  Milner,  "  Her 
Majesty's  Government  have  on  more  than 
one  occasion  repeated  their  assurances  that 
they  have  no  desire  to  interfere  in  any  way 
with  the  independence  of  the  South  African 
Republic,  provided  that  the  conditions  on 
which  it  was  granted  are  honourably  observed 
in  the  spirit  and  in  the  letter;  and  they  have 
offered  as  part  of  a  general  settlement  to 
give  a  complete  guarantee  against  any  attack 

130 


THE    BOER    ULTIMATUM 

upon  that  independence,  either  from  within 
any  part  of  the  British  dominions  or  from 
the  territory  of  a  foreign  State."  Sir  Alfred 
Milner  was  instructed  to  communicate  this 
to  the  Government  of  the  South  African 
Republic. 

The  Republic  rejected  Mr.  Chamberlain's 
qualified  acceptance  of  the  five-year  fran- 
chise and  his  assurances  that  Great  Britain 
had  no  designs  on  the  independence  of  the 
country.  Then  followed  a  period  during 
which  both  sides  began  to  prepare  for  hos- 
tilities. It  seems  impossible  to  determine 
which  side  took  the  first  step  in  this  direc- 
tion. The  British  authorities  at  the  Cape 
declare  that  they  received  positive  informa- 
tion that  the  troops  of  the  Republic  were 
being  concentrated  on  the  Natal  border,  and 
that  as  a  measure  of  self-defence  it  was 
necessary  to  re-enforce  the  British  outposts 
and  send  for  more  regiments.  The  Repub- 
lic, on  the  other  hand,  place  the  facts  the 
other  way. 

On  the  9th  of  October,  1899,  whilst  the 
British  Government  was  still  considering  the 
nature  of  the  fresh  proposals  for  a  settlement 
which  it  intended  to  lay  before  the  Republic, 
President   Kruger,   through   his   State  Secre- 

131 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

tary,  issued  the  following  ultimatum  :  "  (a) 
That  all  points  of  mutual  difference  shall 
be  regulated  by  the  friendly  course  of  arbitra- 
tion or  by  whatever  amicable  way  may  be 
agreed  upon  by  this  Government  with  Her 
Majesty's  Government.  (^)  That  the  troops 
on  the  borders  of  this  Republic  shall  be  in- 
stantly withdrawn,  (r)  That  all  re-enforce- 
ments of  troops  which  have  arrived  in  South 
Africa  since  the  ist  of  June,  1899,  shall  be 
removed  from  South  Africa  within  a  reason- 
able time,  to  be  agreed  upon  with  this  Gov- 
ernment, and  with  a  mutual  assurance  and 
guarantee  on  the  part  of  this  Government 
that  no  attack  upon  or  hostilities  against  any 
portion  of  the  possessions  of  the  British 
Government  shall  be  made  by  the  Republic 
during  further  negotiations  within  a  period 
of  time  to  be  subsequently  agreed  upon  be- 
tween the  Governments ;  and  this  Govern- 
ment will,  on  compliance  therewith,  be 
prepared  to  withdraw  the  armed  burghers  of 
this  Republic  from  the  borders,  (d)  That 
Her  Majesty's  troops  which  are  now  on  the 
high  seas  shall  not  be  landed  in  any  port  in 
South  Africa. 

"  This  Government  must  press  for  an  im- 
mediate and  affirmative  answer  to  these  four 

132 


THE    BOER   ULTIMATUM 

questions,  and  earnestly  requests  Her  Maj- 
esty's Government  to  return  such  an  answer 
before  or  upon  Wednesday,  the  nth  of 
October,  1899,  not  later  than  five  o'clock 
P.M. ;  and  it  desires  further  to  add  that,  in  the 
event  of  unexpectedly  no  satisfactory  answer 
being  received  by  it  within  that  interval,  it 
will  with  great  regret  be  compelled  to  re- 
gard the  action  of  Her  Majesty's  Govern- 
ment as  a  formal  declaration  of  war,  and 
will  not  hold  itself  responsible  for  the  con- 
sequences thereof;  and  that,  in  the  event  of 
any  further  movements  of  troops  taking 
place  within  the  above-mentioned  time  in 
the  nearer  directions  of  our  borders,  this 
Government  will  be  compelled  to  regard 
that,  also,  as  a  formal  declaration  of  war." 

This  brief  narrative  of  the  history  and 
causes  of  the  Anglo-Boer  Conflict  may  be 
brought  to  a  close  by  the  transcription  of 
two  telegrams  from  Mr.  Chamberlain  to  Sir 
Alfred  Milner.  The  first  is  dated  Oct.  10, 
1899,  ^"d  runs:  "Her  Majesty's  Govern- 
ment have  received  with  great  regret  the  per- 
emptory demands  of  the  Government  of  the 
South  African  Republic.  You  will  inform 
the  Government  of  the  South  African  Repub- 
lic, in    reply,  that    the  conditions  demanded 

^33 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

by  the  Government  of  the  South  African  Re- 
public are  such  as  Her  Majesty's  Govern- 
ment deem  it  impossible  to  discuss." 

The  second  telegram  is  dated  Oct.  ii, 
1899.  "Most  urgent.  Inform  British 
agent  in  South  African  Republic  that  the 
Government  of  the  United  States  has  been 
asked  to  allow  their  consul  to  take  charge 
of  agency.  Let  British  agent  try  to  arrange 
accordingly  pending  reply." 

The  Boer  ultimatum  expired  at  five 
o'clock  on  the  nth  of  October,  1899,  and 
within  a  few  hours  the  troops  of  the  Repub- 
lic invaded  the  British  Colony  of  Natal. 

Hostilities  are  still  in  progress  as  I  write. 
Before  they  are  concluded,  thousands  of 
brave  Boers,  thousands  of  brave  British 
soldiers,  will  have  laid  down  their  lives. 
And  the  cause  of  it  all,  in  a  word,  the  fatu- 
ous attempt  of  one  man  to  govern  a  Republic 
at  the  end  of  the  nineteenth  century  by  the 
methods  of  the  seventeenth. 


134 


APPENDIX 


APPENDIX. 

The  following  is  a  list  of  the  principal 
sources  from  which  I  have  drawn  the  infor- 
mation contained  in  this  volume.  Official 
publications  are-not  included. 

BOOKS. 

Aylward,  Alfred.  The  Transvaal  of  To-day.  Edinburgh, 
1878. 

Bartlett,  Sir  .Ellis  Ashmzad.  The  Transvaal  Crisis. 
London,    1896. 

Becker,  George  Ferdinand.  The  Witwatersrand  and  the 
Revolt  of  the  Uitlanders.      Washington,  1896. 

Bryce,  James.  Impressions  of  South  Africa.  New  York, 
1897. 

Carter,  Thomas  Fortescue.  A  Narrative  of  the  Boer 
War  :  Its  Causes  and  Results.      London,  1883. 

Chesson,  F.  W.  The  Dutch  Boers  and  Slavery  in  the  Trans- 
vaal :  A  Letter  to  R.  W.  Fowler,  Esq.,  M.P.  Lon- 
don, 1869. 

Davis,  Richard  Harding.  Dr.  Jameson*s  Raiders  v.  The 
Johannesburg  Reformers.      New  York,  1897. 

De  Fremery,  James.  Reflections  on  Jameson's  Raid.  Oak- 
land, Cal.,  1896. 

Ellis,  Alfred  Burdon.  South  AfHcan  Sketches.  London, 
1887. 

Fisher,  W.  E.  Garrett.  The  Transvaal  and  the  Boers. 
London,  1896. 

Fitzpatrick,  J.  P.  The  Transvaal  from  Within.  New 
York,  1899. 

Froude,  James  Anthony.  Two  Lectures  on  South  Africa. 
London,  1880. 

GiBBs,  Edw.  J.      England  and  South  Africa.     London,  1889. 

Green,  Elsa  Goodwin.  Raiders  and  Rebels  in  South 
Africa.     London,  1898. 

^37 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

Haggard,  H.  Rider.  Cetywayo  and  his  White  Neighbours. 
London,  1882. 

Hammond,  Mrs.  John  Hays.  A  Woman's  Part  in  a  Revo- 
lution.     New  York,  1897. 

HiLLEGAS,  Howard  C.  Oom  Paul's  People.  New  York, 
1899. 

HiLLiER,  Alfred  P.     Raid  and  Reform.      London,  1898. 

"Imperialist.'*     Cecil  Rhodes.      London,  1897. 

Johnston,  Sir  H.  H.  A  History  of  the  Colonisation  of 
Africa  by  Alien  Races.     Cambridge,  England,  1899. 

King,  Rev.  James.  Dr.  Jameson's  Raid  :  Its  Causes  and 
Consequences.     London,  1896. 

Little,  James  Stanley.  South  Africa  :  A  Sketch  Book  of 
Men,  Manners,  and  Facts.      London,  1884. 

Little,  W.  J.  Knox.  Sketches  and  Studies  in  South  Africa. 
London,  1899. 

Livingstone,  David.  The  Transvaal  Boers.  Edinburgh, 
1881. 

Matthews,  Josiah  Wright.  Incwadi  Yami  j  or,  Twenty 
Years'  Personal  Experience  in  South  Africa.  London, 
1887. 

Molteno,  Percy  Alport.  A  Federal  South  Africa.  Lon- 
don, 1896. 

Nixon,  John.  The  Complete  Story  of  the  Transvaal.  Lon- 
don, 1885. 

Noble,  John.      South    Africa,    Past   and  Present.      London, 

1877. 

Phillips,  Mrs.  Lionel.  Some  South  African  Recollections. 
London,  1899. 

Proctor,  John.  Boers  and  Little  Englanders.  London, 
1897. 

Statham,  F.  Reginald.  Blacks,  Boers,  and  British.  Lon- 
don, 1 88 1. 

.      Paul  Kruger  and  his  Times.     London,  1898. 

Theal,  George  McCall.  History  of  South  Africa.  5  vols. 
London,  1888-93. 

.     History  of  the  Boers  in  South  Africa.      London,  1888. 


138 


APPENDIX 

ARTICLES    FROM    MAGAZINES    AND    REVIEWS. 

The  Nineteenth  Century  Magazine. 

The  Prospect  in  South  Africa.  By  the  Right  Hon.  Earl 
Grey.      Vol.  21.      1887.      pp.  428-451. 

South  Africa  as  it  is.  By  John  Robinson.  Vol.  21.  1887. 
pp.  883-900. 

In  Praise  of  the  Boers.  By  H.  A.  Bryden.  Vol.  39. 
1896.     pp.  381-389. 

The  True  Motive  and  Reason  of  Dr.  Jameson's  Raid.  By 
G.  Seymour  Fort.      Vol.   39.      1896.     pp.  871-880. 

British  Suzerainty  in  the  Transvaal.  By  Edward  Dicey. 
Vol.  42.      1897.      pp.  663-672. 

The  Real  Grievances  of  the  Uitlanders.  By  H.  M.  Mey- 
sey-Thompson.     Vol.  43.      1898.     pp.  312-327. 

The  **  Casus  Belli"  in  South  Africa.  By  Edmund  Rob- 
ertson.     Vol.  46.      1899.     pp.  334-344. 

The  Situation  in  South  Africa  :  A  Voice  from  Cape  Colony. 
By  Rev.  C.  Usher  Wilson.  Vol.  46.  1899.  pp. 
522-526. 

The  ^arterly  Revieiv, 

The  Liberals  and  South  Africa.  A  Review  of  Vols,  i,  2, 
and  3  of  Mr.  C.  P.  Lucas's  Historical  Geography  of 
the    British    Colonies.      Article   7  in   Vol.    178.      1894. 

PP-  435-459. 
The  Transvaal  Trouble  :     How  it  arose.      Being    an    Extract 
from  the  Biography  of  the  late  Sir  Bartle  Frere.     By 
John    Martineau.      Article    9    in    Vol.    184.      1896. 
pp.  532-563- 

The  Contemporary  Review. 

The   Expansion   of    South    Africa.     By  John    Mackenzie. 

Vol.  56.      1889.     pp.  753-776. 
The   English   Government   and    the    Boers.     By    W.    Basil 

WoRSFOLD.      Vol.  69.      1896.     pp.  473-483- 
German    Intrigues    in    the   Transvaal.     By  W.  R.   Lawson. 

Vol.  69.      1896.      pp.  292-304. 

139 


THE  ANGLO-BOER  CONFLICT 

The  Conservatism  of  President  Kruger.  By  Herbert  Paul. 
Vol.  76.      1899.      pp.  1-13. 

The  British  Power  in  South  Africa.  By  Sir  Charles  War- 
ren.     Vol.  76.      1899.      pp.  609-627. 

The  Cause  of  the  War.  By  Percy  A.  Molteno.  Vol.  76. 
1899.      pp.  637-647. 

The  Inevitable  in  South  Africa.  By  F.  Edmund  Garrett. 
Vol.  76.      1899.      pp.  457-481. 

The  North  American  Review. 

Problems  of  the  Transvaal.      By   Karl   Blind.      Vol.    162. 

1896.      pp.  457-472. 
South  Africa  and  its  Future.      By  John    Hays    Hammond. 

Vol.  164.      1897.      pp.  233-248. 
England  and  the  Transvaal.      By  Sydney  Brooks.     Vol.  169. 

1899.      pp.  62-76. 
A  Vindication  of  the    Boers.      A  Rejoinder  to   Mr.  Sydney 

Brooks.       By    <*A    Diplomat."      Vol.    169.      1899. 

pp.  362-374. 
A  Transvaal  View  of  the  South  African  Question.      By  Dr. 

F.  V.  Engelenburg.     Vol.  169.     1899.    pp.  471-487. 
Historical   Causes  of  the  War.     By  the  Right  Hon.  James 

Bryce,  M.P.     Vol.   169.      1899.     pp.  737-759. 

The  National  Revieiv. 

The    Native    Problem   in    South    Africa.      By   William    F. 

Bailey.      Vol.  28.      1896.     pp.  543-553. 
The  Case  for  the  Transvaal.      By  F.  Reginald   Statham. 

Vol.  29.      1897.      pp.  325-351- 

The  Fortnightly  Review. 

Our  Boer  Policy.  By  G.  B.  Clark.  Vol.  40  (old 
series).      1883.     pp.  278-289. 

Boer,  Africander,  and  Briton  in  the  Transvaal.  By  Major 
F.  J.  Ricarde-Seaver.  Part  I.  The  Past  and  Pres- 
ent. Vol.  64.  1895.  pp.  197-209.  Part  II.  The 
Future.     Vol.65.     1896.     pp.  111-121. 

140 


APPENDIX 

The  Plain  Truth  about  Mr.  Rhodes  and  the  Transvaal.      By 

"Imperialist."     Vol.65.      1896.     pp.  839-856. 
The  "New  Situation*'  in  South  Africa.     By  **  Diplomati- 

cus."      Vol.  72.      1899.      pp.  160-171. 
British  and  Dutch    in    South    Africa.     By  H.  A.   Bryden. 

Vol.  72.      1899.     pp.  187-196. 
The  Struggle  for   South   African    Supremacy.      By   "  Diplo- 

MATicus."      Vol.  72.      1899.      pp.  335-347. 
Mr.  Chamberlain's  Mistakes.      By  "  Diplomaticus."      Vol. 

72.      1899.      pp.  705-716. 
A    South    African    Settlement.       Anonymous.       Vol.    72. 

1899.      pp.  721-733- 
Some  Notes  on  the  Transvaal  Question.      By  J.  Percy  Fitz- 

Patrick.      Vol.  72.      1899.     pp.  1026-103 1. 

The  Edinburgh  Rcvieiv. 

Great    Britain  in    South  Africa.       Anonymous.     Vol.    183. 
1896.      pp.  273-305. 

BlackivooiTs  Magazine. 

England's   Duty  in  South    Africa.       By    A.   Michie.      Vol. 
160.      1896.      pp.  265-296. 

The  Cosmopolitan. 

Empire  Building  in  South  Africa.      By  Albert  Shaw.      Vol. 
20.      1895-96.      pp.  472-480. 


^\  B  «  A  ^^ 

or  TM« 

UNIVERSITY 


141 


O) 


LIBRARY    Of   THE    UNIVERSITY   OF   CUIFORdU 


(1=1; 


^yiSQ\/-^ii 


o> 


"f  cnnuHH 


>'A  04269 


Mk^'^^M  U.C.  BERKELEY  LIBRARI 

iiniiiiiiiiiii 


CDDbQ773b7 


"^"■^'^^   OF   CMFOBKIA         LIBBARr   OF  T 


HE   «NI^£BSin 


